(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Calendar : meeting of Finance Committee, Board of Supervisors, City and County of San Francisco"

SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 1223 05718 2926 



5/S 




San Francisco Public Library 

Government Information Center 
San Francisco Public Library 
100 Larkin Street, 5th Floor 
San Francisco, CA 94102 



REFERENCE BOOK 

Not to be taken from the Library 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



http://archive.org/details/3calendarmeetingo1992sanf 



CO- 



CALENDAR 

MEETING OF 

FINANCE COMMITTEE 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 



'.CC9 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



WEDNESDAY, JULY 1, 1992 - 2:00 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

PRESENT: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, MIGDEN, HALLINAN 
CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

File 7-92-3 . [Public Transportation] Resolution making a finding concerning 
proposed revisions of the Municipal Railway fare schedule; companion measure to 
File 7-92-3.1. (Public Utilities Commission) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

File 7-92-3.1 . [Public Transportation] Resolution approving a revised fare schedule 
for the San Francisco Municipal Railway; companion measure to File 7-92-3. (Public 
Utilities Commission) 

ACTION: Amended on page 2, line 17, by adding: "8. Souvenir Ticket $3.50". 
Further amended on page 2, line 18-1/2, by replacing "$0.25" with 
$1.00". Recommended as amended. 

File 7-92-3.2 . Resolution prepared in and reported out of Committee 
entitled: "[Using Discount Fast Passes on BART] Urging the Bay Area 
Rapid Transit District to work with the San Francisco Municipal Railway 
in finding a way to allow Municipal Railway passengers with discount 
Fast Passes (disabled and senior users) to be able to use their Fast Passes 
on BART as adult Fast Pass users are now able to to use them." 
Recommended. 

3. File 47-92-4 . [Parking Rate Change] Resolution approving changes in parking rates 
at City-owned parking facilities. (Department of Parking and Traffic) 

(Cont'd from 6/24/92) 

ACTION: Recessed to July 2, 1992, meeting. 

4. File 97-92-37 . [Street Closure Fees] Ordinance amending Administrative Code 
(Temporary Use or Occupancy of Public Streets) by amending Section 2.70-6 thereof, 
to increase the application fee for temporary use of streets for street fairs from 
forty dollars to eighty dollars. (Department of Parking and Traffic) 

(Cont'd from 6/24/92) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

5. File 123-92-2 . [Permit and Inspection Fees] Ordinance amending Public Works Code 
by amending Sections 179, 184.52, 708.2 and 725.3 to change the amounts of various 
fees provided for in those sections. (Department of Public Works) 

(Cont'd from 6/24/92) 

ACTION: Continued to July 22, 1992, meeting. 



6. File 124-92-6 . [Vehicle Removal Administrative Fee] Ordinance amending the 
Traffic Code by adding thereto Section 170.1, relating to imposing an administrative 
fee for removing vehicles from city streets and highways. (Department of Parking 
and Traffic) 

(Cont'd from 6/24/92) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

7. File 124-92-7 . [Abatement of Abandoned Vehicles] DRAFT ordinance amending 
Traffic Code by adding, as Article 13A thereof, Section 225, relating to 
establishment of a service authority for abatement of abandoned vehicles; Section 

226 relating to imposing a service fee for the Abandoned Vehicle Trust Fund; Section 

227 relating to procedures for abatement of abandoned vehicles; and Section 228 
relating to preparation of an Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program and Plan; and 
by amending Article 14 thereof in the following particulars: amending Sections 230, 
231 and 245 thereof, to include highways as property from which abandoned vehicles 
may be removed; further amending Section 231 thereof to add a definition of 
"Director of Parking and Traffic"; and further amending Section 245 thereof, to 
allow moneys received from the State's Abandoned Vehicle Trust Fund to be credited 
to the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement and Removal Fund of the City. (Department 
of Parking and Traffic) 

(Cont'd from 6/24/92) 

ACTION: Amendment of the Whole, approved as to form, adopted. New title: 

"[Abatement of Abandoned Vehicles] Amending Traffic Code by adding, 
as Article 13A thereof, Section 225 relating to establishment of a service 
authority for abatement of abandoned vehicles; Section 226 relating to 
imposing a service fee for the Abandoned Vehicle Trust Fund; Section 227 
relating to procedures for abatement of abandoned vehicles; Section 228 
relating to preparation of an Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program and 
Plan; and Section 229 relating to the definitions of terms; and by 
amending Article 14 thereof in the following particulars: amending 
Sections 230, 231 and 245 thereof to include highways as property from 
which abandoned vehicles may be removed; further amending Section 231 
thereof to add a definition; amending Section 234 thereof to refer to new 
Article 13A of the Traffic Code and to define the scope of the authority 
of the Department of Public Health; amending Sections 235 and 236 
thereof to transfer from the Purchaser of Supplies to the Director of 
Parking and Traffic the authority to enter into contracts for towing; 
adding Section 244.1 authorizing the imposition of a fine on the owners of 
abandoned vehicles; and further amending Section 245 thereof to allow 
moneys received from the State's Abandoned Vehicle Trust Fund to be 
credited to the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement and Removal Fund of the 
City." Recommended as amended. 

8. File 192-92-4. [Abandoned Vehicles] Resolution designating the Parking and Traffic 
Commission of the City and County of San Francisco as the service authority for the 
abatement of abandoned vehicles and establishing a one dollar vehicle registration 
fee on all vehicles registered in San Francisco to be used only for the abatement, 
removal, and disposal of abandoned vehicles. (Department of Parking and Traffic) 

(Cont'd from 6/24/92) 

ACTION: Recommended. 



3 1223 05718 2926 



9. File 97-92-34 . [Fees - Medical Examiner-Coroner] Ordinance amending 

Administrative Code by amending Section 8.14 thereof, authorizing the Medical 
Examiner-Coroner to charge fees for certain services and to increase fees for copies 
of documents and certain services. (Chief Medical Examiner - Coroner) 
(Cont'd from 6/24/92) 

ACTION: Question divided regarding fee for removal and storage of body at 

Medical Examiner-Coroner's Office and Continued to the Call of the 
Chair. (See file 97-92-34.1.) 

Main ordinance, as divided, recommended. 

BUDGET REVIEW 

10. File 100-92-1 . Hearing to consider the Annual Budget of the City and County of San 
Francisco for Fiscal Year 1992-93. (Mayor) 

03 City Attorney 

Human Welfare 

26 Commission on Aging 

34 Human Rights Commission 

48 Commission on the Status of Women 

45 Social Services 

Community Health 

83 Public Health Central Office 

85 Laguna Honda Hospital 

86 San Francisco General Hospital 

87 Community Mental Health Services 

ACTION: Budget Review hearings held. 



7 45243 SFPL: ECONO JRS 

206 SFPL 11/22/00 33 



l5 



l 



CITY AND COUNTY 



l ? ii6Lic Librcmj, (Documents 'Dcpt. 
SWUM Gerrij%ptft 

RANCISCO ^ 




OF SAN Fi 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 

June 29, 1992 



i 



TO: 

FROM: Budget Analyst y 

SUBJECT: July 1, 1992 Finance Committee Meeting 



Finance Committee 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Items 1 and 2 - Files 7-92-3 and 7-92-3.1 



Department: 
Item: 

Description: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Resolution (File 7-92-3) making a finding concerning 
proposed revisions of the Municipal Railway Fare Schedule. 

Resolution (File 7-92-3.1) approving a revised fare schedule 
for the San Francisco Municipal Railway. 

Item 2 (File 7-93-3.1) is a proposed resolution approving 
changes to the Municipal Railway Fare Schedule effective 
August 1, 1992. A comparison of the current and proposed 
fare amounts is as follows: 



Fare Category 



Current 
Fare Amount 



Proposed 
Fare Amount 



Increase/ 
Decrease 



SCHEDULED MOTOR COACH, TROLLEY, LIGHT RAIL VEHICLE AND 
STREETCAR SERVICE: 
Adult Fares 

Single Trip Fare $0.85 

Day Pass 6.00 

Monthly Fast Pass 30.00 

3-Day Pass 10.00 

7-Day Pass 15.00 

Half-month Pass not available 

Token 0.85 

Discount Fares for Senior and Handicapped Individuals 

Single Trip Fare 0.15 

Monthly Fast Pass 4.50 



$1.00 


$0.15 


6.00 


no change 


32.00 


2.00 


10.00 


no change 


15.00 


no change 


16.00 


new category 


0.90 


0.05 


luals 




0.25 


0.10 


5.00 


0.50 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 



Fare Category 



Current 
Fare Amount 



Proposed 
Fare Amount 



Increase/ 
Decrease 



Discount Fares for Youth Five (5) through Seventeen (17) Years of Age 

Single Trip Fare $0.25 $0.25 no change 

Monthly Fast Pass 5.00 5.00 no change 



SCHEDULED CABLE CARE SERVICE: 


Adult Fare 




Single Trip Fare 




Cash 


2.00 


Transfer plus Cash 


LOO 


$0.85 Token Cost plus 




$1.00 cash 


0.85 


Round Trip Ticket 


4.00 


Day Pass 


6.00 


Three-Day Pass 


10.00 


Seven-Day Pass 


15.00 


Monthly Fast Pass 


30.00 


Half Month Pass not available 


30-Ride Ticket Book 


25.50 


Senior and Disabled Fares 




Single Trip 


0.15 


Monthly Fast Pass 


4.50 



3.00 


LOO 


1.00 


no change 


0.90 


0.05 


6.00 


2.00 


6.00 


no change 


10.00 


no change 


15.00 


no change 


32.00 


2.00 


16.00 


new category 


30.00 


4.50 


0.25 


0.10 


5.00 


0.50 



Discount Fares for Youth Five (5) through Seventeen (17) Years of Age 

Single Trip 

Cash 1.00 LOO no change 

Transfer plus Cash 0.75 0.75 no change 

Monthly Fast Pass 5.00 5.00 no change 

Children Under Five (5) Years of Age 

Single Trip no charge no charge no change 

SPECIAL EVENTS SERVICES (PER ROUND TRIP): 

Adult Fares 

Cash 4.00 4.00 no change 

Fast Pass plus added cash 2.00 2.00 no change 

Discount Fares for Students and Senior/Handicapped Individuals 

Cash 3.00 3.00 no change 

Fast Pass plus added cash 2.00 2.00 no change 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

Current Proposed Increase/ 

Fare Category Fare Amount Fare Amount Decrease 

CHARTER SERVICE: 

Full Charter Rate per Hour Cost 

Motor or trolley coach requiring 

no conductor 69.00 69.00 no change 

Light Rail Vehicle requiring 

no conductor 156.00 156.00 no change 

Cable Car requiring 

conductor 169.00 169.00 no change 

Historic street car requiring 

conductor 128.00 128.00 no change 

Item 1 (File 7-92-3) is a companion resolution that makes a 
finding that the proposed fare revisions will increase 
revenues but will not be sufficient to pay for all Municipal 
Railway costs without requiring a tax subsidy. 

Comments: 1. With respect to the companion resolution (File 7-92-3), 

based on the review of the Mayor's FY 1992-93 budget for the 
Municipal Railway, the Budget Analyst concurs that the 
proposed fare revisions will increase revenues but will not be 
sufficient to pay for all Municipal Railway costs without 
requiring a tax subsidy. In FY 1992-93, MUNI will receive an 
estimated $102,921,834 in General Fund monies from the 
City. 

2. The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has submitted 
these resolutions pursuant to Section 3.598 of the Charter, 
which provides that the Board of Supervisors review MUNI 
fare rates. 

3. The resolution approved by the PUC to increase Municipal 
Railway fares included a $1.00 increase from $2.50 to $3.50 for 
the Cable Car Souvenir Ticket. This increase was not 
included in the subject legislation (File 7-92-3.1). The 
proposed legislation should be amended to add the Cable Car 
Souvenir Ticket to the proposed fare schedule. 

4. The proposed fare increases are estimated to provide $7.5 
million in additional revenue to the City. The 1991-92 
projected actual passenger fare revenues for the Municipal 
Railway are $80.1 million or $7.5 million less than the 
estimated $87.6 million revenues for FY 1992-93. 

5. The Mayor's Office has submitted a clerical error which 
transfers $1.3 million from the Transit Improvement 
Development Fund (TIDF) to supplement the estimated $7.5 
million in additional revenue from the proposed fare 
increases identified in this legislation, since an amount of 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 



$8.8 million from MUNI fare revenue increases was included 
in the Mayor's budget for FY 1992-93. The $1.3 million 
revenue difference between the Mayor's budget and the 
estimate from the PUC approved fare rate increases can be 
summarized as follows (The PUC fares, as shown on the 
prior pages would remain the same if this legislation is 
approved. However, since the PUC's recommended fares will 
generate $1.3 less than the Mayor's budgeted revenues, the 
Mayor has submitted a clerical error to use $1.3 million from 
the Transit Impact Development Fee revenue to make up for 
the revenue shortfall): 



Fare Category 

Adult Fare/Pass 
Non-Cable Discount 
Non-Cable Youth 
Cable Adult 
Cable Discount 
Total 



Change in Revenue ($000,000) 
Mayor's PUC 

Recommendation A pproved 



$ 5.1 

0.8 

1.2 

1.6 

_kl 

$ 8.8 



$ 4.1 
0.9 
0.0 
1.9 

0.6 

$ 7.5 



Revenue 
Shortfall 

($ 1.0) 
0.1 
(1.2) 
0.3 
_QA 

($ 1.3) 



6. As shown in the attached table, the average adult cash 
fare charged by 16 other major transit systems is $1.07 as 
compared to the $1.00 adult single trip fare proposed for 
MUNI under this legislation. Adult monthly passes average 
$40.00 although such fares are $50.00 or more in four cities. 
These fares compare with the proposed $32.00 adult monthly 
fare for MUNI. Further, fares for seniors and the disabled 
average $0.44 per ride in other jurisdictions compared to the 
proposed $0.25 for MUNI. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution (File 7-92-3). 

Amend the proposed resolution (File 7-92-3.1) by adding after 
line 17 on page 2 the following: "8. Souvenir Ticket - $3.50" 

Approval of the proposed Resolution (File 7-92-3.1), as 
amended to increase Municipal Railway passenger fares, is 
a policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Attachment 



O 

I 



=<3 



"5 <» 



=? § 3 
S "£ 



g 

3 
3 



5 n 



o i. 
g-a 

— w 
re 3 



g 




& 




to 




a 




8 


3" 


5 


9 


o. 


33 


5" 


V) 



a 5a 

C Q. 
• a «T 



W 



Q to D" c_ 5 
^ o 9 




u 



Pl?l^l?l?IiiA 



Pffisiiltliuif 

fefel Ifi 1*1 I 




mi 



illiilllilfellP 





> 

0) 

^< 

CO 

« 

o 

—•l 
Tl 
0) 

cB 

CO 
o 

3" 
CD 
Q. 

C 

CD 
CO 



3- 
CD 



3. 
o 

H 

s 

W 

CO 

CD 

3 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

Item 3 -File 47-92-4 

Note: This item was continued from the June 24, 1992 Finance Committee meeting. 

Department: Parking and Traffic 

Item: Resolution to change parking rates at 13 City-owned parking garage 

and parking lot facilities. 

Description: Because of the need to increase revenues in the fiscal year 1992-93 

budget, the Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) has determined 
that parking rates at 13 City-owned facilities should be increased to 
achieve a 20 percent increase in revenues from each facility, as 
requested by the Mayor. DPT estimates that the proposed rate changes 
would increase parking revenues by $1,089,543 from $11,338,580 in 
1991-92 to $12,428,123 for 1992-93. 

DPT has based its revenue estimates on 12 months of estimated 
revenues (with the exception of the Sutter-Stockton garage, where rate 
increases are scheduled to take effect October 1, 1992). Since rate 
increases must be approved by the Board of Supervisors and take effect 
30 days following approval by the Mayor, the Budget Analyst estimates 
that the additional revenue would not begin to accrue until 
approximately September 1, 1992. Based on only ten months at the 
increased rates, additional revenues would be only $907,953. 

DPT has submitted an amended proposed resolution indicating that 
hotel parking would also take effect at the Sutter-Stockton Garage on 
July 1, 1992, at a rate of $7.75. According to Mr. Kevin Hagerty of DPT, 
the proposed delay in implementation of hourly rate increases at the 
Sutter-Stockton Garage is intended to permit the Garage to consider 
alternatives to the proposed rate increases, such as expansion of the 
monthly parking program or the viability of a hotel parking program. 
The hotel parking proposal for Sutter Stockton Garage was not 
included in the original proposal submitted by DPT, and is not 
addressed below. 

The proposed rate changes are as follows: 



Civic Center 

lhr 
2hr 
3hr 
4hr 

5hr 
6hr 
7hr+ 



Current 


Proposed 


Percent 


Rate 


Rate 


Increase 


$0.75 


$1.00 


33 


1.75 


2.00 


14 


2.75 


3.25 


18 


4.00 


4.50 


13 


5.00 


6.00 


20 


6.00 


7.50 


25 


7.75 


9.00 


16 



BOARD OF SU PERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

6 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 





Current 


Proposed 


Percent 




Rate 


Rate 


Increase 


Special Event 


4.00 


5.00 


25 


Motorcycle (Day) 


1.00 


1.00 


* 


Monthly 








Private 


125.00 


156.25 


25 


Government 


100.00 


125.00 


25 


Golden Gateway 








lhr 


$2.00 


$3.00 


50 


2hr 


4.00 


6.00 


50 


3hr 


6.50 


9.00 


38 


4hr 


9.00 


12.00 


33 


5hr 


12.00 


15.00 


25 


6hr+ 


16.00 


18.00 


13 


Evening After 6 pm 


4.00 


4.00 


* 


Early Bird 


- 


12.00 


** 


Monthly 


250.00 


260.00 


4 


Motorcycle 








Day 


3.00 


3.00 


* 


Monthly 


50.00 


50.00 


* 


Lombard Street 








Dav 








lhr 


$0.75 


$0.75 


* 


2hr 


1.50 


1.50 


* 


3hr 


2.50 


2.50 


* 


4hr 


4.25 


4.25 


* 


5hr 


5.50 


5.50 


* 


Evening 








lhr 


1.00 


1.00 


* 


2hr 


2.50 


2.50 


* 


3hr 


3.50 


3.50 


* 


Overnight 


4.00 


4.00 


* 


Monthly 


- 


75.00 


** 


Mission-Bartlett 








lhr 


$0.50 


$0.50 


* 


2hr 


1.00 


1.25 


25 


3hr 


1.50 


2.00 


33 


4hr 


2.00 


2.75 


38 


5hr 


2.50 


3.50 


40 


6hr 


3.00 


4.25 


42 


7hr 


3.50 


5.00 


43 


8hr 


4.00 


5.00 


25 


9hr 


4.50 


5.00 


11 


10 hr 


5.00 


5.00 


* 


BOARD OF SI JPERVLSORS 





BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 





Current 


Proposed 


Percent 




Rate 


Rate 


Increase 


Mission-Bartlett (continued) 






Monthly 


$60.00 


$75.00 


25 


Moscone Center 








lhr 


$0.75 


$1.00 


33 


2hr 


1.25 


2.50 


100 


3hr 


2.50 


4.00 


60 


4hr 


4.00 


5.50 


38 


5hr 


5.50 


7.00 


27 


6hr 


7.00 


9.00 


29 


7hr+ 


9.00 


12.00 


33 


Special Event 


5.00 


7.00 


40 


Early Bird 


7.00 


7.00 


* 


Monthly 


130.00 


145.00 


12 


Perform i n f Arts 








lhr 


$.075 


$1.00 


33 


2hr 


1.50 


2.00 


33 


3hr 


2.25 


3.50 


56 


4hr 


3.25 


5.00 


54 


5hr 


4.50 


6.50 


44 


6hr 


5.50 


8.00 


45 


7hr+ 


6.50 


8.00 


23 


Special Event 


4.25 


5.00 


18 


Early Bird 


4.25 


5.00 


18 


Monthly 


100.00 


115.00 


15 


Polk/McAllister 








lhr 


$1.50 


$2.00 


33 


2hr 


2.25 


3.50 


56 


3hr 


2.75 


4.50 


64 


4hr 


4.25 


5.50 


29 


5hr 


6.50 


7.00 


8 


6hr+ 


9.00 


9.00 


* 


Special Event 


4.00 


5.00 


25 


Portsmouth Scruare 








Dav 








lhr 


$0.75 


$1.00 


33 


2hr 


2.00 


2.50 


25 


3hr 


4.00 


4.50 


13 


4hr 


6.50 


7.00 


8 


5hr 


8.75 


9.00 


3 


6hr 


11.25 


11.50 


2 


BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 




BUDGET ANALYST 







Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 





Current 


Proposed 


Percent 




Rate 


Rate 


Increase 


Portsmouth Sauare 


(continued) 


$14.25 




7hr 


$13.75 


4 


8hr 


16.00 


16.50 


3 


Evening 
lhr 




1.00 


** 


2hr 


- 


2.50 


** 


3hr 


- 


4.50 


** 


Overnight 
Monthly 


3.00 
260.00 


3.00 
260.00 


* 

* 


Seventh & Harrison 

lhr 


$1.00 


$1.50 


50 


2hr 


2.00 


2.50 


25 


3hr 


3.50 


3.75 


7 


4hr 


4.50 


5.00 


11 


5 hr+ 


5.50 


6.25 


14 


Overnight 


1.50 


1.50 


* 


St. MaiVs Sauare 

Dav 
0.5 hr 


$1.75 


$2.50 


43 


lhr 


3.50 


4.00 


14 


1.5 hr 


5.25 


5.50 


5 


2hr 


7.25 


7.50 


3 


2.5 hr 


9.25 


9.50 


3 


3hr 


11.25 


11.50 


2 


3.5 hr 


13.25 


13.50 


2 


4 hr+ 


15.75 


17.00 


8 


Evening 
lhr 


0.75 


1.00 


33 


2hr 


2.00 


2.50 


25 


3hr 


4.00 


4.50 


13 


4hr 


5.75 


6.00 


4 


5hr 


7.25 


7.50 


3 


6hr 


9.75 


10.00 


3 


Early Bird 
Monthly 


260.00 


1.00 
260.00 


* 
* 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 





Current 


Proposed 


Percent 




Rate 


Rate 


Increase 


Suttei/fttockton 








lhr 


$0.75 


$1.00 


33 


2hr 


1.25 


1.50 


20 


3hr 


2.50 


2.50 


* 


4hr 


4.75 


5.00 


5 


5hr 


8.00 


8.00 


* 


6hr 


11.00 


11.00 


* 


7 hr+ 


14.75 


15.00 


2 


Nights and Sundavs 


2.50 


2.50 


* 


Early Bird 


. 


8.50 


** 


Monthly 


225.00 


250.00 


11 


Motorcycle 








Day 


2.00 


2.00 


* 


Monthly 


40.00 


40.00 


* 


Valleio Street 








Dav 








lhr 


$0.75 


$1.00 


33 


2hr 


1.50 


2.25 


50 


3hr 


4.00 


4.50 


13 


4hr 


6.25 


6.25 


* 


5hr 


8.50 


8.75 


3 


6hr 


10.50 


10.50 


* 


7hr 


12.50 


12.75 


2 


Evening 








lhr 


1.25 


1.50 


20 


2hr 


2.50 


3.25 


30 


3hr 


5.00 


5.00 


* 


4hr 


7.00 


7.00 


* 


5hr 


9.00 


10.00 


11 


Monthly 


250.00 


275.00 


10 


Union Sauare 








0.5 hr 


$0.75 


$0.75 


* 


lhr 


2.00 


2.00 


* 


1.5 hr 


2.75 


2.75 


* 


2hr 


3.75 


3.75 


* 


2.5 hr 


5.00 


5.25 


5 


3hr 


6.00 


6.25 


4 


3.5 hr 


7.00 


8.00 


14 


4hr 


8.00 


9.00 


13 


4.5 hr 


9.25 


10.00 


8 


5hr 


10.50 


11.00 


5 


5.5 hr 


12.25 


13.00 


6 


BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 





BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 





Current 
Rate 


Proposed 
Rate 


Percent 
Increase 


6hr 
6.5 hr+ 


$13.50 
15.50 


$15.00 
16.00 


11 
3 


Early Bird 

Monthly 

Hotel Parking (daily) 


290.00 


8.50 

310.00 

7.75 


** 

7 
** 


* No change in rate 
** New rate 









Comments: 1. Garage parking rates were last increased in 1991 as a result of a five 
percent increase in the Parking Tax that was passed through to the 
parking customers by an increase in the parking rates. The last increase 
in parking rates alone occurred in 1988. 

2. On June 24, 1992 the Department of Parking and Traffic introduced an 
Amendment of the Whole to the proposed resolution to change some of the 
rates and to include a new hotel parking rate in the Union Square 
Garage. 

3. The proposed increases in garage parking rates will result in increases 
of gross receipts for each facility. The parking fees at each facility include 
the current 25 percent Parking Tax. Two facilities (Sutter/Stockton 
Garage and the Portsmouth Square Garage) also pay the Gross Receipts 
Tax. The Department of Parking and Traffic estimates that the resulting 
increases in these tax revenues will be $758,350 and $281,849 (respectively) 
in 1992-93, in addition to the estimated $1,089,543 increase in garage 
parking revenues (total increased General Fund revenues of $2,129,742 as 
a result of the proposed rate changes). 

4. A total of $2,129,742 estimated revenue increases resulting from the 
proposed garage parking rate increases have been included in the 
Mayor's proposed budget for 1992-93. As noted above, the rates, if 
approved, could not take effect for approximately two months, or 
approximately September 1, 1992. Increased revenues, including tax 
receipts, based on ten months at the proposed increased rates would be 
$1,774,785, which is $354,957 or approximately 16.7 percent less than the 
revenue projected by the Mayor for 1992-93. 

5. At the Finance Committee meeting of June 24, 1992, concerns were 
expressed that the proposed hotel parking program at the Union Square 
Garage represents unfair competition to private garage operators, in that 
the proposed rate of $7.75 is below the current market rate, and may 
represent "predatory pricing." Concerns were also expressed that the 
proposal violates the City's "Transit First" policy, which emphasizes the 
use of public transportation rather than private automobiles, and may 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 



violate the terms of the Union Square Garage lease with respect to 
requirements to provide short term parking. 

Written statements objecting to the proposal were received from 
representatives of the Pansini Corporation, Harsch Investments, 
California Parking, and Metropolitan Parking Corp. 

The operator of the Union Square Garage, CityPark, proposes to designate 
an area in the garage for hotel parking, and to make available 67 parking 
spaces to proprietors of hotels in the Union Square area. An additional 40 
vehicles could be parked by stacking additional vehicles in the aisles, such 
that a total of 107 vehicles could be parked for hotel customers. According 
to Mr. Tim Leonoudakis, Vice President of CityPark, the vehicles would be 
parked by valets employed by the hotels, who would manage the 
placement of the vehicles. Mr. Leonoudakis states that CityPark 
employees would have no involvement with the vehicles parked in the 
hotel parking area. 

6. Mr. Leonoudakis states that the City would incur a cost of $45,000 over 
four years for purchase and installation of a parking gate to accommodate 
the hotel parking program. The gate would enable the garage to maintain 
proper records of the hotels utilizing the parking spaces and the number 
of vehicles parked, using information encoded on cards issued to the hotel 
valets. 

In addition, Mr. Leonoudakis indicates that CityPark has agreed to 
implement additional valet parking over a four week period in November 
and December to accommodate holiday shoppers who might otherwise be 
displaced by the hotel parking program. The City would be responsible to 
pay an additional $10,000 for the cost of valet parking to park shoppers' 
vehicles by stacking some of them in the aisles. Such a valet service 
during the holiday shopping season would enable the garage to 
accommodate an additional 67-75 vehicles, to replace the 67 parking 
spaces dedicated to hotel valet parking. 

Mr. Leonoudakis states that the $45,000 one-time cost of the new parking 
gate and the $10,000 annual cost for valet service during the holiday 
season would be the only additional costs to the City for this program. 
Any other costs associated with the operation of the program would be 
paid by CityPark, according to Mr. Leonoudakis. 

7. Mr. Leonoudakis states that he is confident that the 107 spaces to be 
allocated for hotel parking under the proposal would be fully utilized by 
hotels. He states that the proposed daily parking fee of $7.75 per vehicle 
has been "designed so we receive 100 percent participation." He states that 
he has negotiated prospective agreements with several hotels to occupy 
the 107 spaces. 

Mr. Hagerty states that he understands that the hotels would enter into 
written agreements with CityPark to lease a designated number of spaces 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 



at the $7.75 rate, and that the hotels would remit total payments based on 
this rate and the designated number of spaces regardless of whether or 
not hotel vehicles actually occupy the spaces on any given day. If this 
were done, then CityPark would receive $7.75 per day for 107 parking 
spaces, or $829.25 per day, for annual revenue of approximately $302,676. 
(The Department of Parking and Traffic has calculated that annual 
revenue from this program would be $299,847; however, this number is 
equivalent to participation by 106, rather than 107 vehicles.) 

Under the City's lease with CityPark, the City receives 79.746 percent of 
revenues generated at the Union Square garage. Estimated gross receipts 
in the amount of $302,676 from this program would therefore result in 
estimated revenue to the City of $241,372. However, this figure relies on 
hotel parking being made available for 365 days. If hotel parking were 
available for only ten months (304 days), gross receipts would be only 
$252,230, and the City's percent share would be only $201,143. This is 
$40,229 or approximately 16.7 percent less than the revenue which would 
be generated over twelve months. 

8. Some operators of private garages in the Union Square area have 
expressed concern that CityPark's proposed hotel parking rate of $7.75 per 
day per vehicle does not represent a fair market price for hotel parking in 
the Union Square area. The Budget Analyst notes that since parking 
garages represent a commodity which is in fixed supply, the price of 
parking services will be largely determined by the nature of the demand. 
Mr. Leonoudakis and Mr. Tim Johnson, of the Department of Parking 
and Traffic, indicate that travel to Union Square has been adversely 
affected by the recession and the lingering effects of the Loma Prieta 
Earthquake. Economic principles suggest that if these events have caused 
a decline in demand for parking services in the Union Square area, then 
intensified competition for customers would result in lower prices at 
parking garages in the area. 

The Budget Analyst has been contacted by Ms. Julie De Gregorio, a 
representative for Harsch Investments and California Parking, which 
operate several parking garages at Union Square. Ms. De Gregorio has 
provided a list of rates for 24-hour parking and hotel parking which are 
currently in effect at a number of garages, which is attached to this 
report. The lowest rates shown for hotel parking are $10.00 per vehicle at 
the 450 Sutter Street garage, operated by Harsch Investments, while the 
highest rate is $18 at the 400 Taylor Street Garage. Of the 21 listed rates, 
13, or almost 62 percent, involve prices in the range of $13 to $15. The 
average price is $13.37, although the nature of the services provided at the 
prices shown may vary. 

The Budget Analyst has attempted, through contacts suggested by Mr. 
Leonoudakis and Ms. De Gregorio and by direct requests to both parties, to 
obtain information on the existing rates for hotel parking, the dates the 
rates went into effect, and the general terms of the agreements. In 
particular, information which would affect the market price includes the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 



date the rate was established, the term of the contract, the number of 
vehicles concerned, and whether fees would be paid for a designated 
number of spaces, regardless of usage, or only for the actual number of 
vehicles parked in a given facility. 

Information with this type of specificity has not been provided. Without 
further details as to the nature and terms of the contracts, information 
concerning existing prices is of limited usefulness in gaining insight into 
current pricing practices. 

9. As noted above, Mr. Leonoudakis has stated that the $7.75 proposed 
daily rate was designed to ensure 100 percent participation, and CityPark 
has submitted letters from several hotels indicating that they are 
extremely enthusiastic about the proposed price. Mr. Leonoudakis states 
that the proposed rate is at "the low end of the market," but he argues that 
the proposed rate is designed to induce hotels to participate as quickly as 
possible, in order to generate revenues immediately. 

Mr. Leonoudakis states that he believes the current market would support 
a maximum price of only $9 to $10 per vehicle. However, he is not willing 
to offer a price of $9 or more per vehicle for hotel parking at the Union 
Square Garage, because he asserts that those hotel proprietors with 
whom he has negotiated are unwilling to pay this price. As an example, 
he states that the Grand Hyatt Hotel, one of his potential contractors, is 
presently able to park vehicles at a rate of $8.25 per vehicle, and would be 
unwilling to pay more than the proposed amount of $7.75 to change 
garages. Calls made by the Budget Analyst to the General Manager of the 
Grand Hyatt Hotel were not returned. 

Mr. Leonoudakis has also stated that the Four Seasons Clift Hotel is 
negotiating a rate of $8.25 per vehicle, but this figure was not confirmed by 
the General Manager of the Hotel. Although the Clift Hotel presently pays 
$12.75 per vehicle, based on actual usage, the General Manager of the 
Clift Hotel stated that, in her opinion, the current market rate is probably 
$10.00 per vehicle for vehicles actually parked. A proprietor of another 
hotel in Union Square, who wishes not to be named, indicated that he had 
recently negotiated a contract for $10.00 per vehicle for 25 to 50 vehicles per 
day, although he would pay only for the vehicles actually parked. He 
stated that, in his opinion, the current market rate is probably $9 to $11 
per vehicle. Ms. De Gregorio indicates that Harsch Investments has 
recently negotiated an agreement with a Union Square hotel, which will 
take effect in August, to provide hotel parking at a rate of $10.00 per 
vehicle actually parked. 

10. Mr. Leonoudakis has indicated that the Grand Hyatt Hotel rents a 
specific amount of space in a private garage at Union Square for $8.25 per 
vehicle. As noted above, the General Manager of the Grand Hyatt Hotel 
was not available to provide further information in response to calls by the 
Budget Analyst. Therefore, information is not presently available 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 



concerning the date that the rate may have been established, the period of 
the agreement, nor the number of spaces covered by the agreement. 

Ms. De Gregorio states that the $8.25 rate is misleading, because the 
Grand Hyatt Hotel pays a flat rate for a fixed number of spaces regardless 
of whether or not the spaces are utilized. Ms. Gregorio has submitted 
calculations, based on information provided by the garage operator, to 
indicate that the effective rate to the Grand Hyatt Hotel (the rate paid per 
vehicle actually parked) is $12 to $14 per vehicle. 

11. A "predatory price" is a price which is set below the cost of producing 
a commodity in order to obtain a competitive advantage. To establish such 
a price is a violation of anti-trust laws. Predatory prices interfere with 
competition because they do not reflect actual costs of production and force 
one's competitors to suffer financial losses. In the short run, they can 
damage the financial position of one's competitors by forcing them to 
lower prices below production costs or, alternatively, to risk losing 
customers. Since such prices do not reflect the actual costs of providing a 
service, they cannot be maintained in the long run. 

The question of whether the $7.75 proposed rate for hotel parking at the 
Union Square Garage is a predatory price is beyond the scope of this 
report, since it involves access to proprietary information regarding 
operating costs. However, Mr. Leonoudakis estimates that 4,000-7,000 
spaces are required for hotel parking in the Union Square area. Since the 
market share of the Union Square Garage for hotel parking spaces would 
be insubstantial, even if 107 spaces were set aside for this purpose, the 
garage cannot significantly influence the market price for hotel parking. 

12. The Budget Analyst believes that the statements made by Mr. 
Leonoudakis regarding the proposed $7.75 hotel parking rate are 
sufficient to conclude that the proposed rate represents a discount from 
hotel parking rates presently available in the Union Square area. The 
effect of the rate could be a loss of market share by other garages in the 
immediate vicinity, who could be required to offer a similar price to any of 
their customers who were to consider CityPark's offer. 

13. The hotel parking program has been proposed as a means to increase 
revenues to the Union Square Garage without raising fees for "transient," 
or short-term hourly, parking at that facility. The Department of Parking 
and Traffic, Mr. Leonoudakis, and representatives of private garages 
have all noted the higher rates now charged for transient parking at the 
Union Square Garage as compared to those of other City-owned garages at 
Union Square. Although private garages also offer transient parking at 
Union Square, the above-named representatives have generally agreed 
that transient parking for the general public, especially for persons 
visiting retail establishments at Union Square, are primarily served by 
the public garages. Those garages are the Ellis/O'Farrell Garage, the 5th 
and Mission Garage, the Sutter-Stockton Garage, and the Union Square 
Garage. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 



Mr. Hagerty reports that vacancy rates at the Ellis/O'Farrell garage and 
the Sutter-Stockton garage have typically been significantly lower than the 
estimated 40 percent average vacancy rate at the Union Square garage. 
In fact, Mr. Hagerty states that the Ellis/O'Farrell garage is currently 
being expanded by 376 spaces from 912 to 1,288 spaces to accommodate 
transient parking at Union Square, an increase in capacity of more than 
41 percent. Expansion of the Fifth and Mission garage is also scheduled 
to begin in January 1993, to increase capacity from the current 1,782 
spaces to 2,622 spaces, an increase of more than 47 percent. In contrast, 
the Union Square Garage, with total capacity of 1,100 vehicles, typically 
has several hundred vacant parking spaces, except during holiday 
periods. However, a space availability study submitted by Mr. 
Leonoudakis indicates that on Sunday, December 15, 1991 between the 
hours of 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., the average vacancy rate at the Union 
Square Garage was 492 spaces, or approximately 44.7 percent of the 1,100 
available spaces. If the vacancy rate remains at this high rate at peak 
holiday shopping periods, the Budget Analyst questions the need for 
additional valet parking services, at a cost to the City of $10,000 per year, 
for holiday shoppers. 

14. The Union Square Garage has also proposed a validation program 
whereby merchants will directly purchase parking stamps, at the 
standard rate charged to the public, for distribution to their customers. 
This arrangement would transfer the cost of parking from individual 
consumers to those merchants who believe they would benefit from 
increased patronage. However, the proposal submitted by Mr. 
Leonoudakis indicates that this program would be suspended during 
November and December, during the holiday shopping season. 

15. The Budget Analyst has estimated, based on occupancy rates 
submitted by the Department of Parking and Traffic, that the Sutter 
Stockton Garage realizes average income, based on current rates, of $3.15 
per vehicle, which corresponds to an average stay of approximately 3.3 
hours. In contrast, the average vehicle at the Union Square Garage now 
pays $5.03 for an average stay of 2.5 hours. The Budget Analyst has also 
calculated that, when monthly parking is excluded from consideration, 
the Union Square Garage has 56.2 percent of the capacity of the Sutter 
Stockton Garage. However, the projected gross revenues to the Union 
Square Garage for 1992-93 would be 75.5 percent of the estimated revenues 
for the Sutter-Stockton garage, despite the considerably higher occupancy 
seen at the Sutter Stockton garage. These figures do not include estimated 
gross receipts from the proposed hotel parking program. 

The Budget Analyst believes that the considerably higher hourly parking 
rates at the Union Square Garage, combined with the congestion at other 
public facilities, will yield above average revenues to the Union Square 
garage, even though it is under-utilized. 



BOARD OF SU PERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

However, rate increases at the Sutter-Stockton Garage, if they are 
instituted on October 1, could make additional space available at 
Sutter-Stockton Garage, if some customers choose not to pay the 
higher prices. Since rates at the Sutter-Stockton Garage would still 
be lower than at the Union Square Garage, any additional space at 
Sutter-Stockton could encourage customers of the Union Square 
Garage to park at Sutter-Stockton, and thus result in a decline in 
occupancy at the Union Square Garage. Once the planned 
expansion of the Ellis-O'Farrell Garage is completed in late 
November, occupancy rates at the Union Square Garage could be 
expected to decline further. The Budget Analyst therefore believes 
that attention should continue to be focused on means to fully utilize 
the available space at the Union Square Garage, and suggests that 
lowering the transient parking prices, to make them more 
competitive with the rates of other public garages, may be 
appropriate. Such lower prices, if they result in increased usage, 
could result in overall additional revenue to the City. 

16. With regard to hotel parking prices, the Budget Analyst notes 
that the proposed hotel parking at the Union Square Garage would 
employ a contract similar to the Grand Hyatt Hotel contract 
reported by Mr, Leonoudakis and Ms. De Gregorio, based on a flat 
rate for a designated number of spaces. Since according to Mr. 
Leonoudakis, a rate of $8.25 is reportedly in effect under this type of 
contract, and since Mr. Leonoudakis has indicated an 
unwillingness to exceed a rate of $8.50 to $8.75, the Budget Analyst 
believes that an adjustment of the proposed rate for the Union 
Square Garage from $7.75 to $8.25 or $8.50 should be considered by 
the Finance Committee, following additional discussion by 
interested parties. An increase of $.75 per parking space to $8.50 
would result in additional annual gross receipts of approximately 
$29,291. The City would receive 79.746 percent of this amount, or 
approximately $23,358. 

The Budget Analyst notes that a price of $8.50 would still be below 
the estimated market price of $10 suggested by some hotel 
representatives, which is based on the number of spaces actually 
used by the hotels, rather than a guaranteed payment for a 
specified number of spaces. At a fixed rate of $8.50 for 107 spaces, 
daily revenue to the Union Square Garage for hotel parking would 
be $909.50. If the Union Square Garage instead charged $10 for the 
spaces which the hotels actually used, 91 spaces would have to be 
used each day (or approximately 85 percent of 107 spaces), to 
generate the same $909.50 in gross receipts. 

Recommendation: The proposed garage parking rate increases are a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SIJPERVLSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



i t 



B 

sfcj 



■ i 



ii 



r i 



ATTACHMENT TO FILE NO. 47-92-4 
(July 1, 1992) 

UNION SQUARE HOTEL PARKING RATE SURVEY 

Garages vitb 24 Hour Rates 
(24 Hours with in & out privledgee) 



-tapatipn 



fcason/O ' Farrel 1 
Tay lor/O ' F ar r e 1 1 
Taylor/O' Ftvcrell 
Ellis/Taylor 
Ellis/Powell 

Suttor/Powel 1 

Post/Stockton 
Butter/Powell 
Posit/Mason 
Suiter/ Powell 
450 Sutter Street 
Kaeon/Poet 
Sutter/Stockton 
Ellis / O'Farrell 



-SffiS- 



Prlvate Garage 
Private Garage 
Hilton Hotel 
Hikko Hotel 
St. Francis Hotel 
Holiday Inn Uni^n Sq. 
Hyatt on Union Square 
Sir Francis Drake 
Pan Pacific Hotel 
private (White House) 
Private Garage 
Donatello Hotel 
City Garage 
City Garage 



2 4 ftE. Rate 



16.50 
18.00 
18.00 
21.00 
20.00 
18. OO 
20.00 
20.00 
20.00 
20.00 
16.75 
19.00 
14.75 
17.25 



BOTSIi 0PFSITS/ OVERFLOW RATES 

^Includes in $ ant pJElvled^es) 

valet Service Hot Included in Kate 



goMl 



* Clift Hotel 
Alexander Hotel 
Mark Twain Hotel 
Pan pacific Hotel 

Hilton Hotel 
Hilton Hotel 
Hilton Ho;fcel 
Park 55 Hotel 
St. Francis Hotel 
** Hyatt Hotel 

Marines Hetaorial 

sjieehan Hotel 
Mikko 

C oiapt on Place 
Chancellor 
Cart right. 

In On Union Square 

King George Hotel 

Kapheal 

Villa Florence 

Park 55 



Parking Fac ility 



>«te 



400 Taylor St. 


$ 12.75 


N « « 


12.50 


n * « 


12.50 


520 Mason St. 


16.00 


400 Taylor St. 


18.00 


261 Ellis St. 


13.00 


Downtown Center 


14.00 


Hilton Garage 


15.00 


Downtown Center 


14.00 


white House Garage 


13.00 


Olympic Garage 


13.00 


n m 


13.00 


261 Ellis St. 


13.00 


4 SO Sutter 


IS. 00 


450 Sutter 


10.00 


450 Sutter 


10.00 


450 Stttter 


10.00 


Downtown Center 


14.00 


Downtown Center 


14.00 


Downtown Center 


14.00 


Downtown Center 


14.00 



£ 



I The City Park rate survey indicated that the clift Hotel pays 
""0 per car fox 24 hour hotel parking. This is fai.ee. Tte ciift 
$12.7 5.' Barrett Corporation had charged the Clift $7.50, a 
which remained, in effect for over 10 years, before leasing the 
ge to 'California Parking company in April of thie year. The 

rate was not an "arms length agreement" it reflected a 
lajtionship between the Barrett Corp. and the owner of the Clift 

1 Property. Theoc partieo do buisness in varioue capacities at 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

Item 4 - File 97-92-37 

Note: This item was continued from the Finance Committee meeting of June 24, 
1992 



Item: 



Description: 



Comments: 



Ordinance amending Chapter 2, Article VIII, San 
Francisco Administrative Code (Temporary Use or 
Occupancy of Public Streets), by amending section 2.70-6 
thereof, to increase the application fee for temporary use 
of streets for street fairs from $40 to $80 dollars. 

Chapter 2, Article VIII of the San Francisco 
Administrative Code outlines procedures for the closure of 
streets for public events sponsored by private groups or 
community organizations. 

The proposed ordinance would raise the fee for filing an 
Application for Temporary Use of Street for Street Fair 
from $40 to $80. The application must be filed no later 
than 90 days prior to the proposed date of the event. 

There are two types of fees which must be paid by 
community groups for street closures. One is the 
application fee (the subject of the proposed ordinance) 
which must accompany an Application for Temporary Use 
of Street for Street Fair. The second type of fee is the "Fee 
to be Charged for the Permit," which is determined 
according to a schedule of fees also contained in Article 
VIII of the Administrative Code. The proposed ordinance 
would not amend the permit fees, including rates of 
reimbursement for the services of City Departments, but 
would only amend the fee for filing the street closure 
application. 

1. Mr. Tim Johnson of the Department of Parking and 
Traffic (DPT) indicates that there have been 172 public 
events in 1991-92 for which street closure applications 
were filed. The revenue from these street closure 
applications, at $40 per application, was $6,880. 

2. In contrast, Mr. Johnson indicates that DPT's actual 
costs for processing the applications, consisting primarily 
of personnel costs, is estimated to have been $13,722 in 
1991-92. Based on 172 events, the $40 increase in the 
application fee to $80 would generate $13,760, and would 
offset the Department's actual costs to process street 
closure applications, according to Mr. Johnson. The 
increase in revenue resulting from the $40 increase in the 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

application fee would be $6,880 per year, if the higher 
application fee were imposed for the entire fiscal year. 

However, the Budget Analyst notes that since two 
readings of the proposed ordinance are required prior to 
approval by the Board of Supervisors, and because the 
proposed ordinance would not take effect until 30 days 
after the date it is signed by the Mayor, it is doubtful that 
the proposed higher fee could take effect until 
approximately September 1, 1992, after two months of the 
fiscal year had passed. Based on an average of 14.33 
applications per month, and a $40 fee for 2 months and an 
$80 fee for ten months, the estimated total revenue for 
street closure application fees in 1992 if the proposed 
ordinance is approved would be $12,610. 

3. As noted, if the application fee were raised from $40 to 
$80 and 172 applications are filed in 1992-93, revenues in 
1992-93 would be $12,610, or $1,112 less than the 
Department's 1991-92 cost to process the applications, as 
reported by Mr. Johnson. The Budget Analyst notes that, 
with salary standardization for clerk positions at DPT of 
approximately 9.5 percent, the Department's processing 
costs would increase from $13,722 in 1991-92 to 
approximately $15,026 in 1992-93. However, the 
proposed increase in the application fee would generate 
$12,610, or $2,416 less than DPT's projected costs of 
$15,026 in 1992-93. 

4. Mr. Johnson indicates that the street closure 
application fee is paid for a variety of events, which are 
not limited to street fairs. Athletic events are included, as 
are block parties and many other small assemblies. 

5. The Department of Parking and Traffic's proposed 
1992-93 budget includes projected revenue in the amount 
of $13,200 from the street closure application fee, or $590 
more than the revised estimates of $12,610. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance in order to recover the 

Department's costs of providing these services. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

Item 5 - File 1 23-92-2 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of June 
24, 1992. 

Department: Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Bureau of Engineering 

Item: Ordinance amending Part II, Chapter X, of the San 

Francisco Municipal Code (Public Works Code) by amending 
Sections 179, 184.52, 708.2 and 725.3 to increase the amounts 
of various fees provided for in those sections. 

Description: The Department of Public Works (DPW) currently collects 

fees to cover the costs of processing various permits for 
encroachment of public sidewalks. 

DPW proposes to increase those fees as shown below: 



Type of Permit 



Existing Fee 
$360/year 



Proposed Fee 
$l,200/year 



Tables and Chairs 
Distribution of Free Sample 

Merchandise $80/occurrence $100/day 

Sidewalk Reconstruction $12/100 sq. ft. $15/100 sq. ft 
Debris Boxes $10/box $20/box 



Percentage 
Increase 

233.3 

25.0 

25.0 

100.0 



1. The Department has provided the Budget Analyst with fee 
and revenue information for FY 1991-92 and FY 1992-93 on its 
Street Use Management Program, which includes fees and 
revenues for the subject four permits (Attachment). The 
Department reports that the Street Use Management 
Program estimates total expenditures of $2,173,528 in FY 
1991-92, of which approximately $1,402,000 or 65 percent, is 
recovered through fees. The proposed fee increase would 
increase those fee revenues by approximately $168,000 to 
$1,570,000 in FY 1992-93, which is an increase of 
approximately 12 percent. Total projected expenditures for 
FY 1992-93 is $2,295,513, such that the proposed fee increase 
which would total $1,570,000 would result in a cost recovery of 
68 percent of these costs. 

2. Mr. Vit Troyan, Director of Public Services in the DPW, 
reports that the Department does not recover the full costs of 
its Street Use Management Program because the Program 
includes such general government functions as pavement 
management and inspection of roadway structures. 
Although, in general, the Budget Analyst recommends 
approval of fees to recover Department expenditures, given 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

that the proposed fee increases range up to 233 percent, the 
Budget Analyst believes approval is a policy matter for the 
Board of Supervisors. 

3. The Mayor's FY 1992-93 budgeted revenues includes the 
proposed revenue enhancement of $168,000. 

4. Mr. Troyan has informed the Budget Analyst that the 
Department will request a continuance of the proposed 
ordinance to the Finance Committee meeting of July 22, 1992, 
for the purpose of permitting the Department to hold a public 
hearing on the proposed fee increases. 

5. Based on an anticipated effective starting date of 
approximately September 1, 1992, Mr. Troyan reports that a 
delay of approximately two months in implementing the 
proposed fee increases would reduce the FY 1992-93 revenue 
estimate by approximately $28,000 to $140,000. 

Recommendations: 1. The decision of whether to increase fees in the Street Use 
Management Program is a policy decision for the Board of 
Supervisors. 

2. Continue the item to the July 22, 1992, Finance Committee 
meeting as requested by the Department. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

22 



Attachment 



CO 
05 

8S 

<y> 

CC 
< 

in 
>- 

_j 
< 
O 

CO 

tr 
o 

< 

UJ 

CC 

o 



UJ 
UJ 

U- 

co 

o 

UJ 

2 

_! 
UJ 

O 

CO 



Q 
UJ 
CO 

o 

CL 

O 

tr 
cl 







UJ > 



«* 5 



1 * 






8 # 5 



.3 

3 
8 g 

« s •« 

to o o 



§ I 



23 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

Item 6. 7 and 8 - File 124-92-6. 124-92-7 and 192-92-4 

Note: These items were continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of 
June 24, 1992. 



Department: Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) 

Item: 124-92-6 : Ordinance amending Article 9 of Part II, Chapter 

XI of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Traffic Code) by 
adding Section 170.1 relating to imposing an administrative 
fee for removing vehicles from City streets and highways. 

124-92-7 : Draft Ordinance amending Part II, Chapter XI of 
the San Francisco Municipal Code (Traffic Code) by adding, 
as Article 13A, Section 225 relating to establishment of a 
service authority for abatement of abandoned vehicles; 
Section 244.1 relating to imposing a fine on owners of 
abandoned vehicles; Section 226 relating to imposing a 
service fee for the Abandoned Vehicle Trust Fund; and 
Section 228 relating to preparation of an Abandoned Vehicle 
Abatement Program and Plan; and by amending Article 14 
in the following particulars: amending Sections 230, 231 and 
245 to include highways as property from which abandoned 
vehicles may be removed; further amending Section 231 
thereof to add a definition of "Director of Parking and 
Traffic"; and further amending Section 245 to allow monies 
received from the State's Abandoned Vehicle Trust Fund to 
be credited to the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement and 
Removal Fund of the City. 

192-92-4 : Resolution designating the Parking and Traffic 
Commission of the City and County of San Francisco as the 
Service Authority for the Abatement of Abandoned Vehicles 
and establishing a $1.00 annual registration fee on all 
vehicles registered in San Francisco to be used only for the 
abatement, removal, and disposal of abandoned vehicles. 

Description: The California Vehicle Code Section 9250.7 allows counties to 

establish service authorities to handle abandoned vehicles 
and impose a $1.00 annual vehicle registration fee to 
reimburse the counties for costs to administer the program. 
Such fees are collected by the State Department of Motor 
Vehicles from vehicle registration fees and disbursed to the 
counties based on the number of registered vehicles in the 
county. To date, 20 counties have established service 
authorities and imposed the $1.00 vehicle registration fee. 

These three proposed pieces of legislation would establish: 1) 
the City's Parking and Traffic Commission as the Service 
Authority for Abandoned Vehicle Abatement, 2) the $1.00 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

annual registration fee, 3) authorize the Director of Parking 
and Traffic to impose a fine upon the owner of any abandoned 
vehicle removed and 4) the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement 
and Removal Fund to deposit the $1.00 registration fees 
received from the State. The Abandoned Vehicle Abatement 
and Removal Fund would be used only for the abatement, 
removal, and disposal of abandoned vehicles. In addition, the 
proposed legislation would include highways as a place 
where abandoned vehicles could be removed by the City. 
Streets are included in the definition of highway. 

Comments: 1. There are approximately 464,000 vehicles registered in the 

City and County of San Francisco. Thus, the proposed $1.00 
annual vehicle registration fee would generate an estimated 
$464,000 annually. The Department of Motor Vehicles would 
collect an administrative fee of approximately one percent or 
$4,640 annually from the amount collected. Thus, the City 
would collect approximately $459,360 annually to administer 
the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program. 

2. Currently, the Department of Parking and Traffic 
Enforcement Division manages the Vehicle Abatement and 
Removal Program which entails dispatching the tow trucks, 
writing citations, issuing warnings, and etc. 

3. According to the Department of Parking and Traffic, the 
annual administrative costs associated with the abatement 
and removal of abandoned vehicles is $424,759. These costs 
are currently being funded by the General Fund through the 
Department of Parking and Traffic's Enforcement Division. 
For FY 1992-93, such expenses are included in DPT's 
Enforcement Division's General Fund budget. The 
Department reports that if the proposed ordinances and 
resolution are approved by the Board of Supervisors, 
collection of the proposed $1.00 vehicle registration fee would 
begin January of 1993, when the State permits counties to 
implement the fee. As such, in FY 1992-93, the City would 
collect an estimated $230,000 that would be deposited into the 
Abandoned Vehicle Abatement and Removal Fund account 
and then transferred to the General Fund as a 
reimbursement. General Fund contributions would be 
reduced in FY 1992-93 by approximately $230,000 and in FY 
1993-94 by approximately $424,759. 

4. The Board of Supervisors would appropriate the funds 
from the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement and Removal Fund 
as a revenue in DPT's annual budget, beginning in FY 1993- 
94. In FY 1992-93, as described above, the Abandoned Vehicle 
Program will be funded with General Fund monies and 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

25 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

reimbursed $230,000 later in the year by the Abandoned 
Vehicle Abatement and Removal Fund. 

5. In addition to establishing the proposed $1.00 vehicle 
registration fee, the proposed ordinance (File 124-92-7) would 
authorize the Director of Parking and Traffic to impose a fine 
on the owner of an abandoned vehicle for the reimbursement 
of the costs of removal and administration of the abandoned 
vehicle program. According to Mr. Tim Johnson of the 
Department of Parking and Traffic, the Department of 
Parking and Traffic already imposes a fine of $50 (scheduled 
to increase to $53 in FY 1992-93) on owners of abandoned 
vehicles under Traffic Code 37A which prohibits leaving 
vehicles in the same place for more than 72 hours. According 
to Mr. Johnson, the proposed ordinance would codify the 
existing fine. 

6. The July 1, 1992 Finance Committee calendar lists File 124- 
92-7 as a draft ordinance. However, according to the City 
Attorney's Office, File 124-92-7 is now in final form. 

Recommendations: The proposed ordinances and resolution are policy matters 
for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

26 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

Item 9 - File 97-92-34 

Note: This item was continued from the Finance Committee Meeting on June 
24, 1992. 

1. The proposed ordinance would amend the Administrative Code by 
amending Section 8.14 to authorize the Medical Examiner/Coroner to establish 
fees for certain services and to increase fees for copies of documents and certain 
services. 

2. Section 8.14 of the Administrative Code outlines the Medical 
Examiner/Coroner's fee schedule for copies of documents and certain services. 
The proposed ordinance would amend Section 8.14 to increase fees for copies of 
documents and certain services as follows: 



Type of Document or Service 

Proof of Death for Insurance Purposes 
Statement of Attending Physician at Death 
Certified Copy of Verdict of Inquest 
Certified Copy of Necopsy (gross examination 

of autopsy) Report 
Certified Copy of Pathology Report 
Certified Copy of Toxicological Report 
Certified Copy of Coroner's Register Page 
Search of Records 
Disaster Bags for Decomposed, Accident 

or Infectious Disease Cases 
Forensic Autopsy performed on non-Medical 

Examiner/Coroner's cases or Outside County 
X-rays 

Copies of X-rays 
Re-cut Microscopic Slides 
Outside Use of Facilities for Identification 

of Remains 25.00 30.00 5.00 

Storage of Remains for Funeral 

Directors for Other than Medical Examiner/ 

Coroner's Cases, per Day 5.00 25.00 20.00 

Removal and Storage of Remains from Rest 

Homes or Other Agencies that have no 

Facilities for Cold Storage 
Autopsy Reports to Hospitals and Attending 

Physicians 
Certified Copy of Letter Confirming Death 

Pending Completion of Autopsy 
Forensic Alcohol Report 
Blood Screen for Drugs, I 
Blood Screen for Drugs, II 
Blood Quantification for Drugs 

BOARD OF SUP ERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Fee 
Current 


Proposed 
Fee 


Increase 


$2.00 
2.00 
2.00 


$5.00 
5.00 
5.00 


$3.00 
3.00 
3.00 


5.00 
5.00 
5.00 
5.00 
5.00 


7.50 
7.50 
7.50 
7.50 
7.50 


2.50 
2.50 
2.50 
2.50 
2.50 


15.00 


15.00 





900.00 
8.00 
5.00 
8.00 


1,200.00 
50.00 
10.00 
10.00 


300.00 

42.00 

5.00 

2.00 



45.00 


100.00 


55.00 


2.00 


5.00 


3.00 


2.00 


5.00 


3.00 


55.00 


65.00 


10.00 


.25.00 





(125.00) 


50.00 





(150.00) 





250.00 


250.00* 



Fee 


Proposed 




Current 


Fee 


Increase 


$125.00 


$250.00 


$125.00 


125.00 


150.00 


25.00 


150.00 


175.00 


25.00 


75.00 


100.00 


25.00 


90.00 


250.00 


160.00 


100.00 


150.00 


50.00 


110.00 


200.00 


90.00 


150.00 


200.00 


50.00 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 



Type of Document or Service 

Urine Testing for Drugs 

Gastric Screen 

Tissue Screen 

Pre-trial Conference at Medical Examiner/ 

Coroner's Office 
Pre-trial Conference at County of Request 
Deposition at Medical Examiner/Coroner's Office 
Court Testimony, Criminal Case, Toxicologist 
Deposition Outside San Francisco County 
Court Testimony, Criminal Case, Forensic 

Pathologist 200.00 250.00 50.00 

*The Blood Quantification for Drugs fee is being substituted for the Blood 
Screen for Drugs, I and II fees. 

3. Additionally, Section 8.14 would be amended to add a new fee for services 
as follows: 

Proposed 
Fee 

1) Removal and Storage of Body at Medical Examiner/ 

Coroner's Office (Government Code 27422) $100.00 

4. In relationship to the above noted new fee, Section 8.14 would also be 
amended to add new language which provides that pursuant to Section 27472 of 
the Government Code, whenever the Medical Examiner/Coroner takes custody of 
a dead body, the Medical Examiner/Coroner may charge the person entitled to 
control the remains (as specified in Section 7100 of the Health Code), the actual 
expense incurred in removing the body from the place of death and keeping the 
body until its release to the person responsible for its interment. The charge for 
such services would be in an amount not to exceed $100, and would not include 
expenses of keeping the body during the time necessary for the Medical 
/Examiner/Coroner to perform his or her duties in connection with it. If the 
charge is not paid initially, it may be considered a part of the funeral expenses 
and paid as a preferred charge against the estate of the decedent. All cases 
brought into the Medical Examiner/Coroner's Office would be charged for these 
services, with the exception of the following: (1) decedents under 14 years of age, 
(2) homicides, (3) in custody or police involved cases, (4) indigents (County 
disposition), (5) cases in which private charitable funds available to pay funeral 
costs would thereby be reduced so as to preclude payment and (6) any cases 
specifically exempted at the discretion of the Medical Examiner/Coroner or his 
designee. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

5. Finally, Section 8.14 would be amended to stipulate that "All fees received 
for documents and services mentioned in this Section shall be deposited with the 
Treasurer and shall be used to defray the costs incurred bv the Medical 
Examiner/Coroner in issuing such documents or providing such services". 
instead of "shall be deposited with the Treasurer and recorded as revenue for the 
Medical Examiner/Coroner's Office." This amendment corrects the legislation to 
bring it into compliance with Government Code 54985-54987. The amended 
language reflects the Medical Examiner/Coroner's use of the revenues generated 
by these fees, to directly offset costs to provide these services. 

1. The Medical Examiner/Coroner's 1991-92 budget originally included a 
revenue amount of $45,000 for the existing fees. However, as of the writing of this 
report, the Department's estimated revenue for 1991-92, based on these fees, is 
approximately $25,000. The Department projects that the proposed fee schedule 
changes will generate an additional $120,000 in revenue annually for a total of 
approximately $145,000 annually. This increased revenue amount is included in 
the Mayor's recommended 1992-93 budget. The Department reports that the 
annual costs to issue the documents and provide the services noted above, is 
approximately $145,000. The Medical Examiner/Coroner advises that 
approximately 90 percent of the additional $120,000 in revenue, or approximately 
$108,000, would be generated by the proposed new fee for removal and storage of 
bodies. 

2. It should be noted that the proposed fee schedule changes will not take 
effect prior to approximately September 1, 1992, because of the time required for 
the Board of Supervisors to process the proposed ordinance and a required 30-day 
grace period, following the Board of Supervisors approval, before the proposed fee 
changes could take effect. As such, it is estimated that the amount of revenue to be 
generated for 1992-93 will total approximately $125,000 or $20,000 less than the 
$145,000 annualized amount. 

R ^ i^m m endation 

Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for the Board of 
Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SU PERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 1, 1992 

Item 10 -File 100-92-1 

Item: This item is a hearing to consider the Annual Budget of the 

City and County of San Francisco for fiscal year 1992-93. 

Note: Please see the Budget Analyst's report dated June 25, 1992 

entitled Recommendations of the Budget Analyst for 
Amendment of the Mayor's Fiscal Year 1992-93 Budget. 



7<W'A 



Harvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



PLEASE NOTE THAT MEETING 
WILL BEGIN AT 3:30 P.M. 
INSTEAD OF 2:00 P.M. 

2- A. 

K CALENDAR ,^, DOCUMENTS D- 

BUDGET REVIEW MEETING 
FINANCE COMMITTEE 
— BOARD OF SUPERVISORS , ™* 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

THURSDAY, JULY 2, 1992 - 3:30 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

PRESENT: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, M1GDEN, HALLINAN 
CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 

1. File 101-92-2 . [Annual Appropriation Ordinance] Annual Appropriation Ordinance 
for Fiscal Year 1992-93. (Controller) 

ACTION: Recessed to July 9, 1992. 

2. File 102-92-2 . [Annual Salary Ordinance] Annual Salary Ordinance for Fiscal Year 
1992-93. (Civil Service Commission) 

ACTION: Recessed to July 9, 1992. 

THE FOLLOWING ITEM. FILE 97-92-25. WILL BE CONSIDERED WHEN THE 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' AND TREASURER - TAX COLLECTOR'S BUDGETS 
ARE REVIEWED : 

3. File 97-92-25 . Hearing to consider the Annual Report on Memberships in 
Organizations. (Various) 

Board of Supervisors 
Treasurer - Tax Collector 

ACTION: Hearing held. Filed. 

File 97-92-25.2 . Ordinance prepared in and reported out of Committee 
entitled: "Amending Administrative Code by amending Sections 16.6-22 
and 16.6-23 thereof, adding six and deleting four organizations 
represented by the Department of Treasurer/Tax Collector." 
Recommended. 

File 97-92-25.3 . Ordinance prepared in and reported out of Committee 
entitled: "Amending Administrative Code by amending Section 16.6-1, to 
correct the name changes of certain organizations in which the Board of 
Supervisors provides representation for the City and County of San 
Francisco." Recommended. 



File 100-92-1 . Hearing to consider the Annual Budget of the City and County of San 
Francisco for Fiscal Year 1992-93. (Mayor) 

General Administration and Finance 

70 Chief Administrative Officer 



93 


Convention Facilities Management 


01 


Board of Supervisors 


25 


Mayor 


23 


Children's Fund 


08 


Treasurer - Tax Collector 


09 


Controller 


91 


Purchaser 


02 


Assessor 


78 


Recorder 


80 


Registrar 


37 


Permit Appeals 


65 


Rent Arbitration Board 


71 


Real Estate 


30 


Civil Service 


33 


Health Service System 


44 


Retirement System 


Public Protection 


13 


Adult Probation 


12 


Juvenile Court 


63 


Law Library 


72 


County Agriculture - Weights & Measures 


74 


Medical Examiner/Coroner 


76 


Animal Care and Control 


79 


Public Administrator/Guardian 


44 


District Attorney 


05 


Public Defender 



97 General City Responsibilities 
99 Capital Projects 
ACTION: Budget Review hearings held. Recessed to July 9, 1992. 



CITY AND COUNTY 




Public Library, (Documents CDept 
mnDi: QerryiRpth 



OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 

June 29, 1992 



TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst /k**"*^ 

SUBJECT: July 2, 1992 Finance Committee Meeting 

Wf 

Items 1 and 2 - Files 101-92-2 and 102-92-2 



DOCUMENT r> r - 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



The proposed Annual Appropriation Ordinance reflects revenues and 
expenditures as contained in the Mayor's recommended 1992-93 budget. The 
proposed Annual Salary Ordinance for Fiscal Year 1992-93 reflects the 
positions as contained in the Mayor's recommended 1992-93 budget. 

Comment 

The Budget Analyst has made numerous recommendations regarding 
reductions and changes to the Mayor's recommended 1992-93 budget, which 
are currently pending before the Finance Committee. 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 2, 1992 



Item 3 - File 97-92-25 



Departments: 



Board of Supervisors 
Treasurer/Tax Collector 



Item: 



Description: 



The following item is a hearing to consider a proposed 
ordinance to amend the San Francisco Administrative Code 
relating to membership organizations as follows: 

1) Amending Section 16.6-1 thereof, correcting names of two 
membership organizations represented by the Board of 
Supervisors. 

2) Amending Sections 16.6-22 and 16.6-33 thereof, adding six 
and deleting four organizations represented by the 
Department of Treasurer/Tax Collector. 

This hearing is to consider an ordinance which would 
correct the names of the following two organizations shown 
in the San Francisco Administrative Code to be represented 
by the Board of Supervisors: 



Current Name 

County Supervisors Association 
of California 

National Association of Black 
County Officials 



Corrected Name 

California State 
Association of Counties 

National Organization of 
Black County officials 



Additionally, the Treasurer/Tax Collector requests an 
ordinance adding the following six organizations to the San 
Francisco Administrative Code to be represented by the 
Treasurer/Tax Collector: 



Organization 

CA Municipal Treasurers' Association 
Govt. Finance Officers' Association 
CA Assoc, of County Treasurers 
CA Municipal Business Tax Assoc. 
CA County Assoc, of Revenue and 

Reimbursement Officers 
Intl. Organization of Wang Users 
Total 



Annual 

Membership 

Dues 

$150 

90 

150 

45 

20 



$4a5 



BOARD OF SI TPKKVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 2, 1992 

The Treasurer/Tax Collector also proposes to delete the 
following four organizations currently included in the 
Administrative Code by the Treasurer/Tax Collector: 

Organization 

State Assoc, of County Treasurers 

CA Inheritance Tax Appraisers Assoc. 

County Tax Collectors' Assoc, of CA 

CA Municipal Business Tax Assoc. 

Comments: 1. The Treasurer/Tax Collector's Office reports that because 

the Department has not maintained its memberships in the 
four above-listed organizations which would be deleted from 
the Administrative Code, funds have not been budgeted for 
these organizations for several years. 

2. The Treasurer/Tax Collector's 1992-93 budget includes a 
total of $465 for annual membership dues in the above-listed 
organizations to be added to the Administrative Code. The 
Treasurer/Tax Collector's 1991-92 budget included $350 for 
membership in the above-listed six organizations. The 
proposed increase from $350 to $465 for FY 1992-93 is due to 
increases in membership fees. 

3. The California Municipal Business Tax Association would 
be moved from the Finance and Records Section of the 
Administrative Code (Section 16.6-33) and instead be included 
under the Treasurer/Tax Collector Section of the 
Administrative Code (Section 16.6-22). 

Recommendations: 1) Prepare in and report out an ordinance which would 
amend the San Francisco Administrative Code by amending 
Section 16.6-1 thereof, correcting the names of two 
organizations represented by the Board of Supervisors. 

2) Prepare in and report out an ordinance which would 
amend the San Francisco Administrative Code by amending 
Sections 16.6-22 and 16.6-33 thereof, adding six and deleting 
four organizations represented by the Department of 
Treasurer/Tax Collector. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 2, 1992 



Item 4 -File 100-92-1 



Item: 



Note: 



This item is a hearing to consider the Annual Budget of the 
City and County of San Francisco for fiscal year 1992-93. 

Please see the Budget Analyst's report dated June 26, 1992 
entitled Recommendations of the Budget Analyst for 
Amendment of the Mayor's Fiscal Year 1992-93 Budget. 




Harvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 



KOARI) OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



.a5 



wi» 



CITY AND COUNTY 



y 



/ 




'Public Library, 'Documents CDepi 



OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 

/// 

July 2, 1992 

DOCUMENTS T 

TO: Finance Committee 

SAN FRAKC5SCO 
FROM: Budget Analyst 

SUBJECT: 1992-93 Budget Review "Clean-up" Items 



Items pending final action by the Finance Committee 



Department 

Police Department (page 153 
of the 6/24/92 Budget Analyst 
report to the Finance 
Committee) 



Item 



Other Contractual Services 



Amount 



$85,300 



Municipal Railway (page 2 of 

the Budget Analyst report to 

Finance Committee of 6/30/92 

concerning Mayor's Proposed 

Adjustments to Passenger Incentive Program and 

the 1992-93 Budget) Clean and on Time Program $2,011,396 



Fire Department (page 145 of 
the 6/24/92 Budget Analyst 
report to the Finance 
Committee) 



Holiday Pay 



$181,678 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 2, 1992 



Department 

Commission on Aging 
(Mayor's Budget Adjustment) 
and Budget Analyst Report to 
the Finance Committee of 
6/25/92 for Department of 
Social Services (page 22), 
Department of Public Health, 
Central Office (page 36), and 
Co mm unity Mental Health 
(page 65) 



Item 



Amount 



Cost of Living Adjustment for Non- 
profit Contractors (4.2 percent 
or 4.5 percent) 



$256,557 



Department of Public Health 
Central Office (page 36 of the 
6/25/92 Budget Analyst Report 
to the Finance Committee) 

Department of Public, Central 
Office (page 38 of the 6/25/92 
Budget Analyst Report to the 
Finance Committee) 



Other Contractual Services 



Reproduction 



San Francisco General 

Hospital (page 57) Membership Dues 



$53,876 

$31,000 
$100,270 



General Fund Reserve 

Net of the Mayor's Budget Adjustments (Clerical Errors), the General Fund 
Reserve is approximately $6 million or approximately $4 million less than the $10 
million General Fund Reserve which has been maintained by the Mayor and the 
Board of Supervisors. Last Year, the Finance Committee included a statement in its 
Budget Message that the General Fund Reserve should remain as close as possible 
to the $10 million level since the Committee believed that such a level was "crucial 
for maintaining the highest bond rating possible for the City and for strengthening 
the overall fiscal soundness of the City." 

The Budget Analyst has recommended over $6 million in General Fund cuts 
to the Mayor's budget. If the Finance Committee accepted approximately $6 million 
in cuts, the General Fund Reserve would be approximately $12 million. This 
amount of $12 million compares with the $10.3 million in problem areas identified 
by the Budget Analyst in the Mayor's Budget (net of the problem areas identified by 
the Budget Analyst which were corrected by the Mayor in his Budget Adjustments). 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 2, 1992 

Under such a scenario, the General Fund Reserve would have a balance of $1.7 
million if all of the problem areas identified by the Budget Analyst materialized. 

Restoration of Budget Items Deleted by the Mayor and/or the Inclusion of 
Items not Funded by the Mayor 

The Finance Committee may wish to use some or all of the cuts which the 
Committee has accepted, based on the Budget Analyst's recommendations, in order 
to establish reserves for the purpose of requesting the Mayor to appropriate items 
which the Mayor has deleted in the budget or to appropriate other items which the 
Committee believes should have been in the budget in the first place. The 
Committee has indicated that it has identified various items to be discussed at 
today's Finance Committee meeting. 



Harvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

3 



CALENDAR 

SPECIAL MEETING OF 
FINANCE COMMITTEE 
^rBOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

MONDAY, JULY 6, 1992 - 11:00 A.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

PRESENT: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, MIGDEN, HALLINAN 
CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 



NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 
counter in the Office of the Clerk of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 



File 60-92-4 . [Special Election] Ordinance calling and providing for a special 
election to be held in the City and County on Tuesday, November 3, 1992, for the 
purpose of submitting to the voters of the City and county propositions to incur the 
following bonded debts of the City and County for the acquisition, construction or 
completion by the city and County of the following municipal improvements, to wit: 
$350,000,000 to provide loans for the seismic strengthening of unreinforced masonry 
buildings for affordable housing, market-rate residential, commercial and 
institutional purposes and establishing certain terms and conditions in connection 
with said loans; $158,100,000 for construction and reconstruction of correctional 
facilities to replace the existing San Bruno jail facilities; $40,800,000 for 
construction and reconstruction of Fire Department facilities; that the estimated 
cost of said municipal improvements is and will be too great to be paid out of the 
ordinary annual income and revenue of the City and County and will require 
expenditures greater than the amount allowed therefor by the annual tax levy; 
reciting the estimated cost of such municipal improvements; fixing the date of 
election and the manner of holding such election and the procedure for voting for or 
against the propositions; fixing the maximum rate of interest on said bonds and 
providing for the levy and collection of taxes to pay both principal and interest 
thereof; prescribing notice to be given of such election; consolidating the special 
election with the general election; and providing that the election precincts, voting 
places and officers for election shall be the same as for such general election. 
(Supervisors Hsieh, Gonzalez, Conroy) 

ACTION: Amendment of the Whole bearing same title, as presented by Supervisor 
Hsieh, adopted. Recommended as amended. (To Board as a Committee 
Report for consideration on July 6, 1992.) 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

SAM FfM 

--IC LIBRARY 



2. File 114-92-4 . [Earthquake Hazard Reduction] Ordinance amending Part II, Chapter 
1 of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Building Code) by adding Chapters 14 and 15 
revising Chapters 2, 3 and 23 thereto relating to earthquake hazard reduction in 
unreinforced masonry bearing wall buildings. (Supervisors Hsieh, Migden, Alioto, 
Shelley, Maher, Achtenberg, Kennedy) 
(Transferred from City Services Committee 6/9/92 - Fiscal Impact) 

ACTION: Amendment of the Whole bearing same title, as presented by Supervisor 
Hsieh, adopted. Recommended as amended. (To Board as a Committee 
Report for consideration on July 6, 1992.) (The members of the Finance 
Committee reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Report [89.122E] on 
Earthquake Hazard Reduction in Unreinforced Masonry Buildings: 
Program Alternatives, and considered the findings made by the City 
Services Committee [File No. 114-92-4.1].) 



File 115-92-8 . [Unreinforced Masonry Building Seismic Retrofit] Ordinance 
amending the Planning Code by amending Section 181 to permit nonconforming uses 
to continue following required seismic retrofitting of unreinforced masonry 
buildings; by amending Section 188 to permit a noncomplying structure to exist 
following required retrofit of unreinforced masonry buildings and to permit minor 
modifications to Planning Code requirements in certain circumstances; by amending 
Section 1005 to provide a limited exemption for required retrofit activities of 
unreinforced masonry buildings designated as landmarks or as contributory buildings 
in historic districts; by amending Section 1111.1 to provide a limited exemption for 
required seismic retrofit activities of unreinforced masonry buildings designated as 
significant or contributory building or any category V building in a conservation 
district; and, adopting findings pursuant to Section 101.1. (Supervisors Hsieh, 
Migden, Alioto, Shelley, Maher, Achtenberg, Kennedy) 
(Transferred from City Services Committee 6/9/92 - Fiscal Impact) 

ACTION: Amendment of the Whole bearing same title, as presented by Supervisor 
Hsieh, adopted. Recommended as amended. (To Board as a Committee 
Report for consideration on July 6, 1992.) (The members of the Finance 
Committee reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Report [89.122E] on 
Earthquake Hazard Reduction in Unreinforced Masonry Buildings: 
Program Alternatives and, and considered the findings made by the City 
Services Committee [File No. 114-92-4.1].) 



4. File 97-92-27.2 . [Rent Board] Ordinance amending the San Francisco Administrative 
Code by adding Section 37. 8B thereto to establish expedited hearing and appeal 
procedures for capital improvements which result from seismic work on unreinforced 
masonry buildings pursuant to Building Code Chapters 14 and 15, by amending 
Section 37.2 to provide that dwelling units which have undergone seismic 
strengthening in accordance with Building Code Sections 14 and 15 shall remain 
subject to the Rent Ordinance, with exception, and by amending Section 37.3 to limit 
certain capital improvement passthroughs to 10% per year over the base rent, 
subject to the adoption of Rent Board rules regarding landlord hardship. (Supervisors 
Migden, Hsieh, Achtenberg) 
(Transferred from City Services Committee 6/22/92 - Fiscal Impact) 

ACTION: Amendment of the Whole, as presented by Supervisor Migden, adopted. 
New titJe: "Amending the San Francisco Administrative Code by adding 
Section 37. SB thereto to establish expedited hearing and appeal 
procedures for capital improvements which result from seismic work on 
unreinforced masonry buildings pursuant to Building Code Chapters 14 
and 15 where landlords performed the work with a UMB bond loan, by 
amending Section 37.2 to provide that dwelling units which have 
undergone seismic strengthening in accordance with Building Code 
Chapters 14 and 15 shall remain subject to the Rent Ordinance, with 
exception, by amending Section 37.3 to limit certain capital improvement 
passthroughs to 10 percent per year over the base rent, subject to the 
adoption of Rent Board rules regarding landlord hardship, and by 
amending Section 37.9 to require landlords who demolish their buildings 
pursuant to the Building Code Chapters 14 and 15 to pay relocation 
expenses for their tenants." Recommended as amended. Add Supervisor 
Gonzalez as a co-sponsor. (To Board as a Committee Report for 
consideration on July 6, 1992.) 



City Report 

CITY AND COUNTY O F S A N F R A NC I S C O 





BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 



July 2, 1992 

TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst 

SUBJECT: July 6, 1992 Special Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 1 - File 60-92-4 

Item: Ordinance calling and providing for a special election to be 

held in the City and County of San Francisco on Tuesday, 
November 3, 1992, for the purpose of submitting to the 
voters of the City and County propositions to incur the 
following bonded debts of the City and County for the 
acquisition, construction or completion by the City and 
County of the following municipal improvements: 

To provide loans for the seismic 
strengthening of unreinforced masonry 
buildings for affordable housing, market- 
rate residential, commercial, and 
institutional purposes and establishing 
certain terms and conditions in connection 
with said loans: $350,000,000 

For construction and reconstruction of 
correctional facilities to replace the existing 
San Bruno jail facilities: $158,100,000 

For construction and reconstruction of Fire 

Department facilities: $40,800,000 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 6, 1992 Special Finance Committee Meeting 

Further, the proposed ordinance: 



Description: 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



States that the estimated cost of the above municipal 
improvements is and will be too great to be paid out of the 
ordinary annual income and revenue of the City and 
County and will require expenditures greater than the 
amount allowed by the annual tax levy; 

Recites the estimated cost of such municipal improvements; 

Fixes the date of the election for November 3, 1992, the 
manner of holding such election, and the procedure for 
voting for or against the propositions; 

Fixes the maximum rate of interest of not more than 12 
percent on said bonds and provides for the levy and 
collection of taxes to pay both principal and interest for 
these General Obligation bonds; 

Prescribes notice to be given of the election, consolidates 
the proposed special election with the general November, 
1992 election, and provides that the election precincts, 
voting places and officers for election shall be the same as 
for the general election. 

The Board of Supervisors approved resolutions in June 
1992 which determined the public convenience and 
necessity of three General Obligation Bond measures 
identified above. The total amount of the three proposed 
bond measures is $548.9 million. 

The proposed ordinance would authorize the placement of 
the three proposed bond measures on the November 3, 1992 
ballot. 

1. The proposed ordinance specifies that, if approved by the 
voters, the bonds shall not bear an interest rate greater 
than 12 percent. 

2. The City Attorney's Office advises that, according to 
State law, the proposed ordinance must be adopted by a 
two-thirds majority of the Board of Supervisors. 

3. San Francisco voters must approve the proposed bond 
measures by a two-thirds majority in order to authorize the 
issuance of the General Obligation Bonds. 

Based on previous actions of the Board of Supervisors, 
approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 

Item 2 -File 114-92-4 



Note: This item has been transferred from the City Services Committee because 
it has been determined to have a fiscal impact. 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



Public Works, Bureau of Building Inspection 

Ordinance amending Part II, Chapter 1, of the San 
Francisco Municipal Code (Building Code) by adding 
Chapters 14 and 15 and revising Chapters 2, 3, and 23 
thereto relating to earthquake hazard reduction in 
unreinforced masonry bearing wall buildings. 

The proposed ordinance would add two new sections to the 
San Francisco Municipal Code (Building Code) and amend 
others, all relating to mitigating the hazards of 
unreinforced masonry buildings as they may be affected by 
earthquakes. 

The following definitions apply to the proposed ordinance: 

An Unreinforced Masonry (URM) Wall is a masonry wall 
in which the area of reinforcing steel in each direction is 
less than 25 percent of the minimum steel ratios required 
by the Building Code for reinforced masonry; 

An Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Wall is a URM wall 
which provides the vertical support for a floor or roof for 
which the total superimposed lead exceeds 200 pounds 
per linear foot of wall; 

An Unreinforced Masonry Building (UMB) is a building 
having at least one unreinforced masonry bearing wall. 

According to the proposed ordinance, the purpose of this 
legislation is to promote public safety and welfare by 
reducing the risk of injury and damage to property that 
may result from the effects of earthquakes on existing 
unreinforced masonry bearing wall buildings. 

The proposed ordinance contains findings that would be 
adopted by the Board of Supervisors concerning the 
earthquake threat to San Francisco, the probable effects of 
such an earthquake on UMBs, the resulting threats to 
human life and the economy, and other pertinent 
information, including the following: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 



Eight people lost their lives to falling masonry in the 
Bay Area during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. An 
inventory of UMBs prepared by the Bureau of Building 
Inspection lists approximately 2,000 buildings. 

1,171 UMBs house commercial or industrial uses. 
Over 44,000 jobs are housed in UMBs, comprising 
about 7.5% of total San Francisco jobs. Many UMBs are 
places of assembly including schools, houses of 
worship, theaters, clubs and fraternal societies. The 
general distribution of UMBs in San Francisco is 
shown in Attachment I of this report. Approximately 
800 UMBs have predominantly residential occupancy, 
containing 21,755 dwelling units. Eighty- five percent of 
those units are found in Chinatown, Downtown, North 
and South of Market and in the Bush Street Corridor. 
Approximately 27,000 people live in these units 
including 40% in single-room-occupancy hotels. 

The study "Seismic Retrofitting Alternatives for San 
Francisco's Unreinforced Masonry Buildings: 
Estimates of Construction Cost & Seismic Damage", by 
Rutherford & Chekene, analyzed three alternative 
upgrade retrofit levels and the damage prevention 
effects of each, postulated on an earthquake caused by 
the Hayward Fault of 7.0 magnitude at 3 p.m. The 
lowest level of retrofit, if applied to all UMBs, would cut 
by one-half the expected deaths and injuries and by 
over one-third the expected property damage. The 
intermediate retrofit level would result in about one- 
sixth the deaths and injuries and less than one-half 
the damages. The most stringent retrofit alternative 
would result in about one-eighth the deaths and 
injuries and one-third the damages. 

Compliance with the proposed amendments to the 
UMB Ordinance would, in some cases, be a hardship 
to owners and occupants. It is necessary to balance 
these potential hardships with the benefits of retrofit 
and to offer financing assistance as available, 
education and training, avenues of appeal, and 
waiving of otherwise-triggered code compliance 
requirements. To avoid unnecessary hardships due to 
a shortage of relocation housing, financing, or lack of 
qualified design or construction workers, the timeline 
for compliance shall not be unreasonably short. To 
minimize public risk, however, all UMBs should be 
retrofitted in as short a time period as feasible. 



BOARD OF ST JPERVLSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 






Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 



Chapter 14, titled "Earthquake Hazard Reduction in 
Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Wall Buildings," covers the 
scope of the proposed UMB Program, general compliance 
requirements, and the administration of the Program. The 
proposed new Chapter 15, titled "Seismic Strengthening 
Provisions for Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Well Building," 
contains the technical requirements for seismic strengthening 
of unreinforced masonry bearing wall buildings. 

The major general provisions of the proposed UMB Program 
are as follows: 

a. Residential unreinforced masonry buildings containing 
less than five dwelling units or guest rooms and used solely 
for residential purposes would be exempted from the UMB 
Program. 

b. The Superintendent of the Bureau of Building Inspection 
would be required to issue an order to the owner of each 
building within the scope of the UMB Program to initiate 
UMB retrofit actions. The order would contain a copy of the 
proposed Chapters 14 and 15 of the Building Code, a 
commentary on these chapters, a sample inventory form 
and an engineering report summary form. The owner or 
the owner's agent may appeal the Superintendent's order to 
the Board of Examiners. 

c. The owners of UMBs in receipt of the Superintendent's 
order would be required to have a structural analysis of the 
UMB performed. If the building does not meet the 
minimum standards specified in the Building Code, except 
as provided for in the proposed UMB Program, the owner 
must have the building structurally altered to conform to 
such standards or have the building demolished. 

d. The results of the structural analysis, complemented by an 
inventory form, a risk assessment, and an engineering 
report that details applicable retrofit requirements, all 
within specified time limits that are dependent on the 
UMB's assigned level of risk, would be submitted to the 
Bureau of Building Inspection. If the $350 million bond 
proposal, which is currently before the Finance Committee 
for placement on the ballot for a special election to be held in 
the City on November 3, 1992 (Item 1, File 60-92-4, of the July 
6, 1992, Special Finance Committee Meeting), is not 
approved by the City's electorate, owners of UMBs would not 
be required to have the seismic strengthening work 
performed. If the bond measure is approved, all seismic 
upgrading would be required to be completed within 13 

BOARD OF SUPERVLSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 

years of passage of the $350 million General Obligation bond 
proposal. 

e. This proposed legislation does not require alteration of 
existing electrical, plumbing, mechanical, fire 
protection or life-safety systems that are in compliance 
with the respective codes in effect at the time of their 
original legally permitted construction or installation. 

f. Section 1509(b), which would be a part of the newly 
created Chapter 15 of the San Francisco Building Code, 
describes the minimum standards to be applied to UMB 
structures. Buildings with sufficient mortar strength 
and crosswalls may upgrade to a "Bolts Plus" 1 level if 
other described weaknesses are addressed. Assembly, 
educational and institutional buildings, those with rigid 
floor systems, those over six stories tall (Building Code 
occupancy classifications A, E and I), and those with 
remaining deficiencies, must upgrade to Uniform Code 
for Building Conservation (UCBC) standards. 2 Retrofit 
beyond the level described in Section 104(f) of the existing 
San Francisco Building Code will not be required. 

Comments: 1. The Rutherford & Chekene report, previously cited, 

defines 15 building prototypes, for purposes of assigning 
the approximately 2,000 UMBs to categories to facilitate 
various cost and other analyses. Attachment II to this 
report shows a listing of the 15 prototypes, along with the 
number of UMBs in each category, the percent of all 
UMBs in each category, and a category description. 
Attachment III depicts the 15 UMB prototype 
characteristics and type of occupancy. 

2. Attachment IV to this report, contained in a 
February, 1990 report from the Chief Administrative 
Officer's (CAO's) Office, shows UMB alternative retrofit 
project costs by prototype. Mr. David Prowler of the 
CAO's Office reports that the Task Force on 
Unreinforced Masonry Buildings, which has been 
meeting regularly for the past five years to develop a 
seismic retrofit program for UMBs, currently estimates 



The "Bolts Plus" retrofit level requires anchoring walls to floors and roofs plus measures to 
strengthen walls. 

The UCBC retrofit alternative requires supplementing the Bolts Plus alternative by 
strengthening other building elements including floors, roofs, and walls. In some cases, new 
reinforced masonry or concrete walls, or shotcrete (sprayed concrete) over existing walls may be 
needed. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 



that the total cost for the UMB proposed program would 
be approximately $450 million. 

3. The firm of Recht, Hausrath & Associates, Urban 
Economists, prepared a report for the Department of City 
Planning in October of 1990 titled "Seismic Retrofitting 
Alternatives for San Francisco's Unreinforced Masonry 
Buildings: Socioeconomic and Land Use Implications of 
Alternative Requirements." That report covers the 
following topics related to UMBs: 

Characteristics of UMBs and Occupants 

Alternative Seismic Retrofitting Requirements and 

Costs 
Significance of Retrofitting Costs to Building Owners 

Use and Socioeconomic Impacts 
Construction Period Implications 
Institutional UMBs: Characteristics and Issues for 

Retrofitting 

The Recht Hausrath & Associates report identifies a 
number of pertinent issues concerning the effects of a 
UMB program, including the following: 

a. Short-term property tax revenue implications of 
lower UMB values due to retrofitting 
requirements . Once retrofitting requirements are 
adopted, the market value of UMBs would be 
lowered to account for costs of the required work. 
UMB owners, in some instances, may request 
reassessment. (However, once the work is 
completed, the market value would be restored.) 

b. Property tax revenue implications for building 
outcomes affected bv retrofitting . Assessed values 
and related tax revenues could occur once the 
retrofitting work was completed or once new 
construction, conversion, or demolition occurred 
as an alternative to retrofitting. Property tax 
revenues could be affected as a result of the 
different building outcomes (demolition, converted 
uses, etc.) expected because of retrofitting 
requirements. 

c. Long-term revenue implications of effects of 
retrofitting on the supply of space. For real estate 
markets where higher rents would be expected 
over the longer term as a result of effects of 
retrofitting on the supply of space, market values 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 



for affected properties would be higher as well. As 
such properties were sold over time, they would be 
reassessed at higher values than if they were sold 
at lower market values. As this occurs, property 
taxes would be higher as well. 

d. Hardships for Building Occupants . The potential 
types of disruption include the following: 

(1) Complete relocation from the building for the 
duration of the retrofitting project; 

(2) Limited use of space within the building while 
the work proceeds; 

(3) Inconvenience and complications from living 
or working with noise, debris, drafts, and 
dust; 

(4) Temporary interruption of utility mains 
resulting in loss of power; 

(5) Conflicts with construction related traffic and 
materials storage; 

(6) Security problems. 

e. Hardships for Businesses . Revenues could be 
reduced and/or additional costs, such as moving 
costs, incurred. 

f. Construction Period Economic Benefits. The 
economic benefits of a seismic retrofitting 
program include business for building 
contractors, increased jobs and payroll for 
construction workers, and spending for the 
materials needed to complete the retrofitting 
work. To the extent that relocation is required, 
there would be other benefits in terms of business 
for moving, storage, and equipment rental 
companies and income to landlords of the newly 
rented space. Attachment V to this report 
contains estimates of the magnitude of 
construction labor, construction payroll, and 
spending for materials associated with the 
alternative retrofitting programs. 

4. In addition to the foregoing potential economic 
impacts, the City could benefit financially to a 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 



significant degree from the proposed UMB Retrofit 
Program in the following aspects: 

a. Spending would increase in the City to the extent 
that services, material, and equipment are 
purchased in the City, including consumer 
consumption. The economic multiplier effect of 
such consumption would enhance total spending 
in the City. 

b. Such increased spending would increase the 
City's revenues as a result of higher sales tax 
receipts and increased payroll and gross receipt 
taxes. 

c. Some of the work could possibly take some 
employable persons off the General Assistance 
rolls. 

5. The costs of administering the proposed UMB Retrofit 
Program have not as yet been determined. However, 
most of those costs would be incurred by the Bureau of 
Building Inspection, a special fund Department 
financed by fee revenues obtained through its operations. 
Additionally, the administrative costs of administering 
the Seismic Strengthening Bond Program, approved by 
the Finance Committee at its meeting of June 10, 1992, 
are estimated to be $24,250,000 over the 27-year life of the 
Bond Program. As previously stated, implementation of 
the Seismic Strengthening Bond Program is a 
prerequisite to implementing this proposed Seismic 
Strengthening Program. 

6. The proposed Seismic Strengthening Program would 
also have a fiscal impact should property owners elect to 
demolish structures or construct new buildings in lieu 
of seismically strengthening existing UMBs, in that 
those alternatives would affect assessed property values 
and related tax revenues. 

7. According to Mr. Lawrence Kornfield of the Bureau of 
Building Inspection, even after meeting all the 
requirements of the proposed UMB Program, an 
occurrence of a significant earthquake could result in 
many buildings becoming unusable and requiring 
demolition because the focus of the proposed UMB 
Retrofit Program is to preserve life and prevent 
catastrophic collapse of buildings, not to maintain the 
structural integrity of the buildings. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 



Recommendation: 



8. On June 9, 1992, the City Services Committee 
recommended approval of the proposed ordinance. 

The decision of whether to implement a UMB Retrofit 
Program relating to earthquake hazard reduction in 
unreinforced masonry bearing wall buildings is a policy 
decision for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



10 




> B - h S'-e.Cor ri ^ l ( C 1 ^ ) <'"»». ) 

figure T 



6 North « OWn(293U ^«r 

10MI I r ° n,(36UMB «) 



ii 



Attachment II 



II. ( "Jiarn ctcristics of UMlis and Occu pants 





TABLE 1 




NUMBER OF UNREJNFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS 




BY STRUCTURAL PROTOTYPE 




No. of 


Percent 




Prototype 


UMBs 


of UMBs 


Description 


A 


136 


7% 


Small Area, One-Story 


B 


169 


9% 


Large Area, One-Story 


C 


138 


7% 


Irregular Shape, Residential 


D 


97 


5% 


Irregular Shape, Non-Residential 


E 


89 


4% 


Small Area, Industrial 


F 


143 


7% 


Large Area, Industrial 


G 


236 


12% 


Small Area, 2 & 3 Story, Office & Commercial 


H 


176 


9% 


Large Area, 2 & 3 Story, Office & Commercial 


I 


70 


3% 


Small Area, Over 3 Story, Office & Commercial 


J 


83 


4% 


Large Area, Over 3 Story, Office & Commercial 


K 


162 


8% 


Small Area, 2 & 3 Story, Residential 


L 


147 


7% 


Large Area, 2 & 3 Story, Residential 


M 


139 


7% 


Small Area, Over 3 Story, Residential 


N 


162 


8% 


Large Area, Over 3 Story, Residential 


O 


60 


3% 


Public Assembly 




2,007 


100% 




NOTE: See 


Figure 2 for sketches representative of each prototype. 


The building use classifications indicated for the prototypes do not 


necessarily correspond with the more detailed use classifications developed 


for other aspects of the analysis. 


SOURCE: 1 


Rutherford & Chekene 



12 



Attachment III 
II. Characteristics of UMlis and Occu pants 




A. Small Area. One Siory 




D. Irregular, Nonresidential 




G. Two and Three Story, S man 
Area. Office and Commercial 




J. Over Three Story. Large Area. 
Otica and Commercial 




W. Over Three Story. Small Area. 

R^jkferrta) 




6. Large Area. One Story 




E .Small Area. Industrial 




H. Two and Three Story. Large Area. 

Orflco and Oxnroerdal 






K. Two and Three Story. SmaJ Area. 
ResktenM 




N. Over Three Story. Large Area. 




Irregular. Residential 




Figure 2: The 15 Selected Prototypes 



F. Large Area. Industrial 




L Over Three Story. Small Area. 

OfJce and Commercial 




L Two and Three Story. 
Larps Area. firadenSai 




O. Pvttk Aisercr, 



Attachment: IV 



Summary of Preliminary Findings to Date 
February 27. 1990 



UHO Studies 



(PRELIMINARY ORAFT ) TABLE 7 
LIMB ALTERNATIVE RETROFIT PROJECT COSTS FOR ALL BUILDINGS. BY PROTOTYPE 

FOR VACANT BUILOINGS 

All costs in Oecember 1989 dollars 

This table presents estimated costs by building prototype 
for retrofitting and restoring a moderate level of finish to vacant UHBs 



Prototype/Descriptl 
A - small . 1 story 
B - large, 1 story 

irreg. 

irreg. 

small, 

large, 

sm 



Alternative C Alternative D Alternative E 



sm 

ig 

sm 

ig 

sm 

ig 



Resld. 

Non-Res 

Indust. 

Indust. 

2-3 story, 

2-3 story. 



id 



4+ story, 
4+ story, 
2-3 story. 
2-3 story.. 
4+ story, 
4+ story. 



Off/Comra 

Off/Comra 
Off/Comm 
Off/Comm 

Resld. 

Resld. 
Resld. 
Resld. 



- assembly 



.$ 3.251.000 . 

. 9.960.000 . 

. 18.458.000 . 

. 18.219.000 . 

. 6.216.000 . 

23.429.000 . 

. 16.380.000 . 

. 21.231.000 . 

. 7.666.000 . 

. 17.130.000 . 

. 8.252,000 . 

. 13.291.000 . 

. 11,660.000 . 

. 24,173,000 . 

. 9.333.000 . 



$ 3.539,000 . 
.14.023,000 . 
.29.958.000 . 
.25,500.000 . 
. 7,357.000. . 
.42.128.000 . 
.18.176.000 . 
.31,483.000 . 
.12,850.000 . 
.32,208.000 . 
. 9,056.000 . 
.17.022.000 . 
.28,179.000 . 
.55,319,000 . 
.12,828.000. . 



. $ 4,675,000 
. .16.571,000 
. .50,248.000 
. .47.055.000 

. 10.299.000 
. .52.757,000 
. .24,537,000 
. .42,768,000 
. .18.754.000 
. .53.928.000 
. .12.973.000 
. .24,309.000 
. .33.483.000 
. .94.293,000 

. 18.479,000 



TOTALS $208.649.000 $339.626.000 505.129 .000. 

WITH OCCUPANTS IN PLACE... $274-294 Million $433-467 Million $646-696 Million 
* Refer to Table 5 for more prototype description details. 



Table 7 Indicates that the total cost to retrofit all UHBs to retrofit 
Alternative is about 1.6 times as costly as Alternative C, and Alternative E 
is about 2.4 times as costly as C and about 1.5 times as costly as 0. Among 
prototypes and for any one building these cost differentials vary widely. 

Because of the many mixed use buildings distributed among prototypes, none 
of the prototypes 1s purely residential vs. commercial vs. industrial. 
Therefore, an estimate of the total program cost by use can only be 
approximate. With that limitation 1n mind. 1t 1s estimated that retrofit 
costs with building occupants In place — exclusive of premiums for historic 
buildings, indirect costs, and excluded costs discussed previously — would be 
as presented in Table 8, next page. 



U 



ALLach me ni: V 

VI. Construction I'criotl Implications 



Economic I3enefits of Construction 

Tabic 37 presents estimates of the magnitude of construction labor, construction payroll 
and spending for materials associated with the alternative retrofitting programs. 



TABLE 37 

CONSTRUCTION JOBS, PAYROLL AND SPENDING FOR MATERIALS ASSOCIATED 
WITH RETROFITTING ALTERNATIVES 



Alternative 1 



Alternative 2 



Alternative 3 



Construction Jobs (person-years) 
Total Construction Payroll (1989 $) 
Spending for Materials (1989 $) 



1,500 
$73,129,000 
$33,310,000 



2,200 
$99,776,000 
$78,422,000 



2,400 
$138,776,000 
$128,611,000 



The estimates in the table account only for the construction work to complete basic seismic 
retrofitting. They oo not account for premiums for architecturally or historically significant 
buildings. Work on those more complicated buildings would generate more jobs, payroll and 
spending for materials. The estimates also do not account for other employment and payroll that 
would be associated with a seismic retrofitting program. There would be work for engineers, 
architects, other consultants, and construction project managers, as well as for program 
administrators and inspectors. 



SOURCE: Recht Kausrath & Associates, based on Information provided by Rutherford & Chekene 



The estimates of total construction jobs and materials spending were calculated using the 
conceptual unit-labor and unit-cost factors developed by Don Todd Associates. Inc. (presented in 
Appendix 3 to the R&C report. 1990). Those unit-cost and unit-labor factors were applied by 
prototype and by alternative using the "unit-per-square-foot" and "percent-of-buildings-affected" 
factors from the cost matrices in Section 4: Cost Summary and Report of the R&C report. To 
estimate construction payroll, the share to general conditions, overhead and profit, bond and 
insurance allowance and contingency allowance was subtracted from that number, and the residual 
(total dollars to labor) was further adjusted to account for the 25% sub -contractor's mark -up included 
in the labor-cost-per-unit factors. 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 

Item 3 - File 115-92-8 

Note: This item has been transferred from the City Services Committee because 
it has been determined to have a fiscal impact. 

Item: The proposed ordinance would amend Part II, Chapter II, of 

the San Francisco Municipal Code (Planning Code) by 
amending Section 181 to permit nonconforming uses to 
continue following required seismic retrofitting of 
unreinforced masonry buildings; by amending Section 188 to 
permit a noncomplying structure to exist following required 
retrofit of unreinforced masonry buildings and to permit 
minor modifications to Planning Code requirements in 
certain circumstances; by amending Section 1005 to provide a 
limited exemption for required retrofit activities of 
unreinforced masonry buildings designated as landmarks or 
as contributory buildings in historic districts; by amending 
Section 1111.1 to provide a limited exemption for required 
seismic retrofit activities of unreinforced masonry buildings 
designated as significant or contributory buildings or any 
category V building in a conservation district; and adopting 
findings pursuant to Section 101.1. 



Description: 



The proposed legislation attests to the consistency of the 
proposed Planning Code amendments with the eight priority 
policies of Section 101.1 of the Planning Code. 

The proposed amendments to the Planning Code are all 
designed to facilitate seismic retrofitting of unreinforced 
masonry buildings (UMBs) in as much as those UMBs are 
regulated by the provisions of the Planning Code concerning 
the following uses, issues, or conditions: 

a. Nonconforming Uses 

b. Noncomplying Structure 

c. Demolition Guidelines 

d. Landmarks and Contributory Buildings in Historic 
Districts 

e. Buildings designated as significant or contributory, or any 
Category V Building in a Conservation District 

As defined in the Planning Code, a "nonconforming use" is a 
use which existed lawfully at the effective date of the 
Planning Code, or of amendments thereto, or a live/work unit 
which existed on the effective date of Ordinance No. 412-88 
(effective October 10, 1988) (other than a live/work unit wholly 
or partly occupying space whose legal occupancy under the 
Building Code was then limited to a residential occupancy) 
and which fails to conform to one or more of the use 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 



limitations under Articles 2, 6, 7 and 8 of the Planning Code 
that then became applicable for the district in which the 
property is located. 

As defined in the Planning Code, a "noncomplying structure" 
is a structure which existed lawfully at the effective date of 
the Planning Code, or of amendments thereto, and which 
fails to comply with one or more of the regulations for 
structures, including requirements for off-street parking and 
loading, under Articles 1.2, 1.5, 2.5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Planning 
Code, that then became applicable to the property on which 
the structure is located. 

According to Mr. Alec Bash of the Department of City 
Planning, an example of nonconforming use would be a 
corner grocery market in a residentially zoned district that 
was permissible when built but would not be permissible in 
that district under current zoning regulations. Mr. Bash 
states further that an example of a noncomplying structure 
would be a residentially zoned lot containing a residential 
building that has 100 percent lot coverage and thus does not 
comply with the current Planning Code standards for yards 
and for open space. 

Section 181 of the Planning Code regulates enlargement, 
alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming uses and 
any structure occupied by such use. In general, a 
nonconforming use is not to be enlarged, intensified, 
extended or moved to another location, with certain 
exceptions, unless the nonconforming use is eliminated. 

With certain exceptions, a structure occupied by a 
nonconforming use is not to be constructed, reconstructed or 
altered, unless the result will be elimination of the 
nonconforming use. 

The proposed ordinance would provide that a structure 
containing a nonconforming use and constructed of 
unreinforced masonry that is inconsistent with the 
requirements of the UMB Seismic Retrofit Ordinance (see 
Item 2, File 114-92-4, of the Special Finance Committee 
meeting of July 6, 1992) may be demolished and reconstructed 
with the same nonconforming use or other nonconforming 
use permitted by Section 182 of the Planning Code, provided 
that there is no increase in any nonconformity, or any new 
nonconformity, with respect to the use limitations of the 
Planning Code. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 



Section 188 of the Planning Code regulates enlargements, 
alterations, and reconstruction of noncomplying structures. 
In general, a noncomplying structure may be enlarged, 
altered or relocated, or undergo an intensification of use, 
provided that with respect to the structure there is no 
increase in any discrepancy between existing conditions on 
the lot and the required standards for new construction set 
forth in the Planning Code. 

The proposed ordinance would provide that a noncomplying 
structure constructed of unreinforced masonry that is 
inconsistent with the requirements of the UMB Seismic 
Retrofit Ordinance (See Item 2, File 114-92-4, of the Special 
Finance Committee meeting of July 6, 1992) may be 
demolished and reconstructed to the same level of 
noncompliance, provided that (1) the current requirements of 
the Building, Housing, Fire, and Planning Codes are met, 
and (2) such reconstruction is initiated within one year after 
razing or other demolition work on the structure and such 
reconstruction is diligently pursued to completion. 

Regarding the Planning Code reference in (1) above, the 
proposed amendments would authorize the Zoning 
Administrator to permit minor modifications to Planning 
Code requirements to the extent necessary and required to 
bring the replacement building up to such applicable Code 
requirements and to allow the replacement building to 
contain a comparable square footage or the same number of 
residential units as the demolished building. The Zoning 
Administrator would be required to provide a written 
determination regarding such permitted Planning Code 
modifications. 

The proposed ordinance would also amend Section 1005, 
Conformity and Permits. Section 1005 is contained in Article 
10 of the Planning Code, which is concerned with and titled 
"Preservation of Historical, Architectural, and Aesthetic 
Landmarks." 

The proposed amendment to Section 1005 would provide that 
in addition to other instances when the Department of City 
Planning is obligated to process a building permit application 
without further reference to the provisions of Article 10, 
when the application is for a permit to comply with the UMB 
Seismic Retrofit Ordinance and the Zoning Administrator 
determines that the proposed work complies with the UMB 
Retrofit Architectural Design Guidelines, which guidelines 
shall be adopted by the Planning Commission, no further 
reference to the provisions of Article 10 will be made. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

1R 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



The proposed ordinance would also amend Section 1111.1, 
Determination of Major Alteration. Section 1111.1 is 
contained in Article 11 of the Planning Code, which is 
concerned with and titled "Preservation of Buildings and 
Districts of Architectural, Historic, and Aesthetic 
Importance in C-3 Districts." 

The proposed amendment to Section 1111.1 would provide 
that if the sole purpose of an alteration is to comply with the 
UMB Seismic Ordinance and the Zoning Administrator 
determines that the proposed work complies with the UMB 
Retrofit Architectural Design Guidelines, the alteration will 
be considered minor. 

1. The proposed ordinance would have a fiscal impact on 
assessed property values and related tax revenues if the 
seismic strengthening requirements caused certain property 
owners to select new construction or demolition as an 
alternative to seismically retrofitting their buildings. 

2. On June 9, 1992, the City Services Committee 
recommended approval of the proposed ordinance. 

Approval of the proposed ordinance would be consistent with 
the Board of Supervisors enacting legislation relating to 
earthquake hazard reduction in unreinforced masonry 
bearing wall buildings (see Item 2, File 114-92-4, of the 
Finance Committee calendar of July 6, 1992). 

Approval of the proposed legislation to allow nonconforming 
uses to continue and noncomplying structures to exist 
following required retrofit of unreinforced masonry buildings 
is a policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF S UPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 

Item 4 - File 97-92-27.2 

Note: This item has been transferred from the City Services Committee 
because it has been determined to have fiscal impact. 

Item: Ordinance amending the San Francisco Administrative Code 

by adding Section 37. 8B thereto, to establish expedited 
hearing and appeal procedures for capital improvements 
resulting from seismic work on unreinforced masonry 
buildings pursuant to Building Code Chapters 14 and 15, by 
amending Section 37.2 to provide that dwelling units which 
have undergone seismic strengthening in accordance with 
Building Code Sections 14 and 15 shall remain subject to the 
Rent Ordinance, except when the Rent Ordinance conflicts 
with the seismic strengthening bond program, the 
program's loan agreements, or any related regulations, and 
by amending Section 37.3 to limit capital improvement 
passthroughs to ten percent per year, subject to the adoption 
of Rent Board rules regarding landlord hardship. 

Description: The proposed ordinance would add Section 37. 8B to the San 

Francisco Administrative Code, which would contain the 
procedures for all hearings concerning certification of capital 
improvements resulting from seismic strengthening of 
unreinforced masonry buildings (UMBs) pursuant to 
Building Code Chapters 14 and 15. Section 37. 8B would 
specify the following requirements for certification of such 
capital improvements: (1) landlords must complete the 
above-mentioned capital improvements in compliance with 
Building Code Chapters 14 and 15; (2) landlords must not 
have increased the rent(s) to reflect the cost of such capital 
improvements; and (3) landlords must not have been 
compensated for the capital improvement work by insurance 
proceeds. 

Section 37. 8B also would provide that costs of such capital 
improvements shall be equally allocated to each unit and 
amortized over a ten year period or the life of any loan 
acquired for the capital improvements, whichever is longer. 
Furthermore, Section 37. 8B would provide that interest shall 
be limited to the actual interest rate charged on the loan, with 
a maximum interest rate of ten percent permitted per year. 

Section 37. 8B would restrict the certification of capital 
improvement costs to those items required to be in 
compliance with Building Code Chapters 14 and 15 and limit 
the cost of these items to the costs set forth in a publication of 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 



(2) Evidence presented at the hearing establishing the 
extent and the cost of the work performed; 

(3) The "bolts plus" cost range publication, which is to be 
produced by the City agency designated to administer the 
seismic strengthening bond loan program; 

(4) Tenant objections that the work has not been completed; 
and 

(5) Any other relevant factors as the Rent Board shall 
specify in rules and regulations. 

Furthermore, Section 37. 8B would provide that the hearing 
officer make no determination as to the tenants' correct base 
rents during this expedited hearing. Section 37. 8B would 
require that the hearing officer make written findings of fact, 
copies of which would be mailed within twenty-one days of 
the hearing. The hearing officer's decision would be final 
unless the Rent Board vacated it on appeal. 

Section 37. 8B would permit either party to appeal the hearing 
officer's decisions in writing, in accordance with Section 
37.8(0(1), (0(2) and (0(3), within 15 calendar days of the 
mailing of the findings of fact in most instances. Once the 
appeal would be received, the entire administrative record of 
the matter would be filed with the Rent Board. The Rent 
Board would, at its discretion, hear appeals, considering 
factors such as fairness to the parties, hardship to either 
party, the policies contained in Chapter 37 of the 
Administrative Code, and the comments of the hearing 
officer. The Rent Board would decide whether or not to accept 
an appeal within 21 days. 

The appeal procedures of Sections 37.8(0(5), (0(6), (0(7), (0(8) 
and (f)(9) would apply, with the only exception being that the 
Rent Board's decision would be rendered within 20 days of the 
hearing. These clauses specify that appeals accepted by the 
Rent Board shall be heard within 45 days of the filing of the 
appeal, that the appellant and respondent shall be able to 
present oral testimony and written documentation, that the 
parties shall be notified of the Rent Board's decision by mail, 
and that appeal decisions are effective on the date mailed to 
parties. 

Lastly, Section 37. 8B would provide that rent increases which 
the Rent Board approved on appeal would not be imposed by 
landlords without at least sixty days notice to the tenants. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 2 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 

The proposed amendment of Section 37.2 would provide that 
units in UMBs that have undergone seismic strengthening 
in accordance with Building Code Chapters 14 and 15 would 
remain subject to the Rent Ordinance to the extent that the 
Ordinance is not in conflict with the seismic strengthening 
bond program or with the program's loan agreements or 
with any related regulations. 

The proposed amendment of Section 37.3 would provide that a 
landlord's rent increase in any 12-month period, based upon 
the cost of capital improvements, rehabilitation or energy 
conservation measures, cannot exceed ten percent of the 
tenant's base rent, subject to rules adopted by the Rent Board 
to prevent landlord hardship. Furthermore, the proposed 
amendment would allow a landlord to accumulate any 
certified increase which exceeds the 10 percent amount and 
impose the increase in subsequent years. 

Comments: 1. The sponsor of this proposed legislation reports that as of 

the writing of this report, the City Attorney is preparing an 
amendment of the whole that will be introduced at the Special 
Finance Committee meeting of July 6, 1992. According to the 
sponsor, the amendment of the whole will provide that UMB 
owners who do not obtain construction financing under the 
provisions of the UMB Bond Program would not be able to 
participate in the expedited hearing processes established in 
this proposed ordinance. 

2. Mr. Joe Grubb, Executive Director of the Rent Board, 
reports that the proposed ordinance could result in an 
undetermined but substantial potential increase in the Rent 
Board's workload, because the Rent Board would be 
responsible for adjudicating disputes. As a result, the 
Budget Analyst has determined that the proposed ordinance 
has a fiscal impact. 

3. On June 22, 1992 the City Services Committee 
recommended approval of the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SI JPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



23 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 6, 1992 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed legislation to establish expedited 
hearing and appeal procedures for capital improvements 
resulting from seismic work on unreinforced masonry 
buildings, to keep seismically strengthened dwelling units 
under the Rent Ordinance, with certain exceptions, and to 
limit capital improvement passthroughs to 10 percent per 
year, with provisions for landlord hardship, is a policy 
matter for the Board of Supervisors. 

Harvey M. Rose 

cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



F c 

CALENDAR Doc Uf/!£ NT „ 

f\TZ, meetinoof 



dept. 



///// 



_ ANCE COMMITTEE 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO pj FFtA ^C;s c ^ 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 8, 1992 - 2:00 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, MIGDEN, HALLINAN 

CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 

NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 
counter in the Office of the Clerk of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 

CONSENT CALENDAR 

1. All matters listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are considered to be 
routine by the Finance Committee, and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote 
of the Committee. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a 
member of the Committee or a member of the public so requests, in which event the 
matter shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a separate 
item. 

a. File 23-92-6 . [Claims Against the Government] Resolution waiving the Statute of 
Limitations with respect to payment of seven certain warrants of the City and 
County of San Francisco, in an amount totalling $12,936.87 legal obligations of the 
City and County of San Francisco. (Controller) 

b. File 25-92-22 . [Contracting Out City Services - Police Department] Resolution 
concurring with the Controller's certification that janitorial services can be 
practically performed for San Francisco Police Department facilities by private 
contractor for lower cost than similar work services performed by City and County 
employees. (Police Department) 

c. File 25-92-23 . [Prop J Contracting] Resolution concurring with the Controller's 
certification that security services can be practically performed for the Department 
of Public Health, San Francisco General Hospital by private contractor for a lower 
cost than similar services performed by City and County employees. (Department of 
Public Health) 

d. File 101-91-38.2 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, Public 
Library, in the amount of $214,380, for Library Management Services salaries and 
benefits during 1992/93. (Public Library) 

e. File 133-90-1.7 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, Chief 
Administrative Officer - Solid Waste Management Program, in the amount of 
$150,000, for hauling services, for a project entitled "Milkrun/Service for Small 
Businesses in the City" (H&H Environmental Service Company, contractor). (Chief 
Administrative Officer) 



f. File 146-91-83.3 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, 
Department of Public Health/ AIDS Office, in the amount of $33,944, for AIDS/HIV 
Prevention and Education Services, tuberclosis testing (Urban Health Study, 
contractor). (Department of Public Health) 

g. File 79-91-2.4 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, Mayor's 
Office of Economic Planning and Development, 1992 Community Development Block 
Grant Program, in the amount of $63,465, for hiring a coordinator for the Enterprise 
Zone Program. (Mayor's Office of Economic Planning & Development) 

h. File 100-91-1.29 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, 

Department of Public Health, in the amount of $750,000, for six month contract 
evaluation services of the Health Management Systems, Inc. (HMS) installation and 
implementation of the Electronic Claims Submission System. (Department of Public 
Health) 

i. File 68-92-8 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the Mayor of the City 
and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and expend funds in the amount of 
$35,991 made available through the Office of Criminal Justice Planning for a project 
entitled "Gang Prevention Program GVSP", and agreeing to provide matching funds 
in the amount of $3,599. (Mayor) 

j. File 130-92-3 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Chief Adult 

Probation Officer of the City and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and 
expend funds in the amount of $105,055 made available through the Office of 
Criminal Justice Planning for a project entitled "Gang Caseload Component of the 
Intensive Services Unit", and agreeing to provide matching funds in the amount of 
$11,673. (Adult Probation Department) 

k. File 130-92-4 . [Anti-Drug Abuse Funds] Resolution authorizing the Chief Adult 
Probation Officer of the City and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and 
expend funds in the amount of $188,400 made available through the Office of 
Criminal Justice Planning for a project entitled "San Francisco Adult Probation's 
Drug Abatement Project". (Adult Probation Department) 

1. File 138-92-2 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the District Attorney of 
the City and County of San Francisco to apply for funds in the amount of $112,970 
made available through the Office of the Attorney General for the operation of a 
project entitled "Child Victim Witness Investigative Pilot Project", for the twelve 
month period July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. (District Attorney) 

m. File 138-92-3 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the District Attorney of 
the City and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and expend grant funds in 
the amount of $236,141 made available through the California Office of Criminal 
Justice Planning for the operation of the Career Criminal Program for the twelve 
month period July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 and agreeing to provide cash match 
in the amount of $23,614. (District Attorney) 



n. File 138-92-4 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the District Attorney of 
the City and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and expend funds in the 
amount of $330,812 made available through the Office of Criminal Justice Planning 
for a project entitled "San Francisco District Attorney's Drug Abatement Project", 
for the twelve month period July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. (District Attorney) 

o. File 143-92-2 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the Chief of Police of 
the City and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and expend funds in the 
amount of $137,962 made available through the Office of Criminal Justice Planning 
for a project entitled "San Francisco Police Department's Drug Abatement Project". 
(Police Commission) 

p. File 146-92-41 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the Department of 
Public Health, AIDS Office, to apply for a continuation grant of $1,794,405, which 
includes indirect costs in the amount of $207,155 based on twenty percent of 
personnel costs, from the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for 
Disease Control, to continue funding the Epidemiologic Study of the natural history 
of HIV/ AIDS in homosexual/bisexual men previously enrolled in studies of Hepatitis B 
Infection. (Department of Public Health) 

q. File 146-92-43 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the Department of 
Public Health, AIDS Office, to accept and expend a supplemental grant of $39,501 
from the Health Resources and Services Administration to augment the Ryan White 
Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (Care/Title Formula) Disaster Relief 
Grant; waiving indirect costs and providing for ratification of action previously 
taken. (Department of Public Health) 

r. File 146-92-44 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the Department of 
Public Health, AIDS Office, to accept and expend a supplemental grant of $420,851, 
which includes indirect costs in the amount of $45,418, based on twenty percent of 
salaries, from the Centers for Disease Control to funds the HIV Incidence in 
Homosexual/Bisexual Males Research Project; providing for ratification of action 
previously taken. (Department of Public Health) 

s. File 146-92-45 . [Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan and Budget] Resolution 
authorizing adoption of the 1992-94 Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan and 
Budget Supplemental Perinatal Outreach Plan. (Department of Public Health) 

t. File 146-92-46 . [Allocation - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Department 
of Public Health, Community Public Health, Bureau of Health Promotion and 
Education, to accept and expend $2,127,666, which will include indirect costs equal 
to thirteen percent of personnel costs from the State Department of Health 
Services, provided that the Department of Public Health expends the funds 
consistent with the 1992-94 Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan and Budget, and 
the Supplemental Perinatal Outreach Plan and Budget; companion measure to File 
146-92-45. (Department of Public Health) 



File 152-92-2 . [Anti-Drug Abuse Funds] Resolution authorizing the Sheriff of the 
City and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and expend funds in the 
amount of $84,558 made available through the Office of Criminal Justice Planning 
for a project entitled "San Francisco Sheriff's Drug Abatement Project". (Sheriff) 

File 146-92-36 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the Department of 
Public Health, AIDS Office, to apply for, accept and expend a grant of $99,534, from 
the Health Resources and Services Administration to fund the Field Test of the 
Uniform Reporting System Project; waiving indirect costs and providing for 
ratification of action previously taken. (Department of Public Health) 

File 146-92-37 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Department of 
Public Health, Community Public Health Services, Family Health Bureau, to apply, 
accept and expend a grant of $470,769, which includes indirect costs in the amount 
$20,530 based on ten percent of allowable salaries and a required match in the 
amount of $318,913, which is sixty seven percent of the total award, from the State 
Department of Health Services, Maternal Child Health Branch for perinatal outreach 
services, and to execute a contract with the State for $470,769 and any amendments 
thereto which do not increase this amount. (Department of Public Health) 

File 146-92-38 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Department of 
Public Health, Community Public Health Services, Family Health Bureau, to accept 
and expend a grant of $377,803, which includes indirect costs in the amount of 
$7,046 based on ten percent of allowable salaries and a required match in the amount 
of $55,971, which is 14.8 percent of the total award, from the State Department of 
Health Services, Maternal Child Health Branch for perinatal and related services, 
and to execute a contract with the State for $377,803 and any amendments thereto 
which do not increase this amount. (Department of Public Health) 

File 148-92-4 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the Director of 
Public Works to apply for, accept and expend Federal funds in the amount of 
$7,257,000 for pavement renovation of various streets as listed in this resolution. 
(Department of Public Works) 

File 38-92-17.1 . [Gift Acceptance] Accepting a gift from Richard Goldman, Warren 
Hellman, John Rosecrans and Alfred Wilsey of Artistic Painting Services valued at 
$24,000 ($6,000 each) for the decorative painting of temporary plywood surfaces in 
and adjacent to the main rotunda of San Francisco City Hall, and authorizing the 
firm of Evans and Brown to perform such work. (Department of Public Works) 

File 141-92-2 . (Grant Private Fundsl Resolution authorizing the San Francisco 
Juvenile Probation Department to apply for, accept and expend grant monies from 
the San Francisco Foundation ($30,000) and Kaiser Family Foundation ($25,000) for 
the development of a multi-disciplinary assessment instrument, classification system 
and workload study; waiving indirect cost. (Juvenile Probation Department) 

ACTION: 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

2. File 124-92-3.1 . [Parking Meter Revenue Allocation] Ordinance amending Traffic 
Code by amending Section 213, to provide that in Fiscal Year 1992-93 the first $8.0 
million in parking meter revenues will be allocated to the General Fund and revenues 
in excess of $8.0 million will be allocated to the Off-Street Parking Fund. 
(Department of Parking and Traffic) 

ACTION: 



3. File 96-92-4 . [Sale of Surplus Property] Ordinance authorizing the sale of surplus 
City-owned property to Mission Housing Development Corporation, for development 
of 50 units of low-income senior housing; and to adopt findings pursuant to Planning 
Code Section 101.1. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

4. File 61-92-5 . [Contract Award Extension] Resolution granting extension of time for 
awarding Municipal Railway Contract No. MR-898, 14 Mission Line Trolley Overhead 
Reconstruction (Phase A, Persia Avenue to Daly City Loop). (Public Utilities 
Commission) 

ACTION: 



File 64-92-19 . [Lease of Property] Resolution authorizing extension of an existing 
lease of real property at 1625 Van Ness Avenue for offices for the Department of 
Social Services' Child Welfare Division. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 



6. File 64-92-20 . [Lease of Property] Resolution authorizing extension of an existing 
lease of real property at 1182 Market Street for offices for the Commission on the 
Aging. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 



File 64-92-21 . [Extension of Existing Real Property Sublease] Resolution 
authorizing extension of an existing sublease of real property at 3000 Third Street 
for Municipal Railway, required for maintenance and storing of Municipal Railway 
buses. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 



8. File 64-92-15 . [Lease of Property] Resolution authorizing a revocable license at 450 
Seventh Street for the Police Department, for parking of police vehicles. (Real 
Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

9. File 64-92-16 . [Lease of Property] Resolution authorizing extension of lease of real 
property at 732 Brannan Street for the District Attorney's Office. (Real Estate 
Department) 

ACTION: 

10. File 64-92-17 . [Lease of Property] Resolution authorizing renewals and extensions 
of nine certain existing leases of real property required by the Retirement System, 
Police Department, Department of Public Works, Fire Department, Public Utilities 
Commission and the Fine Arts Museum. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

11. File 64-92-18 . [Amendment to Lease of Property] Resolution authorizing 
amendment lease of real property at 1540 Market Street for Department of Public 
Health, Emergency Medical Services Agency. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

12. File 47-92-1.1 . [Award of Auto Detail Area Lease] Resolution confirming award of 
the auto detail area lease at the Golden Gateway Garage to Five Star Parking. (Real 

Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

13. File 61-92-4 . [Contracting Award Extension] Resolution granting extension of time 
for award Hetch Hetchy Contract No. HH-829, O'Shaughnessy Dam Septic System 
Rehabilitation, Phase II. (Public Utilities Commission) 

ACTION: 

14. File 64-92-9 . [Extension of Existing Real Property Lease] Resolution authorizing 
extension of an existing lease of real property at 1975-99 Bryant Street for 
Department of Parking and Traffic, Traffic Engineering Division. (Real Estate 
Department) 

ACTION: 



15. File 64-92-10 . [Extension of Existing Real Property Lease] Resolution authorizing 
extension of an existing lease of vacant land at Army and Evans Streets for 
Department of Public Works, for storage of equipment and recycled road materials. 
(Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

16. File 64-92-11 . [Extension of Existing Real Property Lease] Resolution authorizing 
extension of an existing real property lease for the Controller's Payroll and Internal 
Audit Division at 160 South Van Ness Avenue. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

17. File 64-92-12 . [Extension of Sublease Lease] Resolution authorizing extension of 
sublease of real property require by the Department of Public Works at 1170 Market 
Street, 7th Floor for use as offices for the Personnel and Computer Services 
Division. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

18. File 64-92-13 . [Extension of Existing Real Property Leases] Resolution authorizing 
extensions of three certain existing leases of real property for the Department of 
Social Services. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

19. File 64-92-14 . [Extension of Existing Real Property Leases] Resolution authorizing 
extensions of eight certain existing leases of real property for various City 
departments. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

20. File 65-92-9 . [Lease Amendment] Ordinance approving Second Amendment to lease 
between Mission Creek Harbor Association and the City and County operating by and 
through the San Francisco Port Commission. (Supervisor Maher) 

ACTION: 

21. File 97-92-39 . [Street Closure Fees] Ordinance amending Administrative Code 
(Temporary Use or Occupancy of Public Streets) by amending Section 2.70-1 thereof, 
to increase the application fee for temporary use or occupancy of public streets 
from forty dollars to eighty dollars. (Department of Parking and Traffic) 

ACTION: 



FINANCE COMMITTEE 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
ROOM 235, CITY HALL 
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 



IMPORTANT 
HEARING NOTICE 



City Report 



CITY AND COUNTY 







OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 



July 6, 1992 



TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst 

SUBJECT: July 8, 1992 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item la - File 23-92-6 

Department: Controller's Office 

Item: Resolution waiving the statute of limitations with respect to 

the payment of seven warrants of the City and County of San 
Francisco in the sum of $12,936.87. 

Description: According to Section 10.181 of the San Francisco 

Administrative Code, a warrant issued by the City and 
County of San Francisco becomes void one year from the date 
issued. The payee of the warrant may present such warrants 
to the Controller for payment up to three years from the date 
that it was considered invalid, or four years from the original 
issue date. After that point, the Controller may no longer 
issue any warrants because the statute of limitations has 
expired unless approval is obtained from the Board of 
Supervisors. 

The proposed resolution would waive this statute of 
limitations and would authorize the Controller's Office to 
replace the following seven warrants: 



Memo to Finance Committee 








July 8, 1992 












Name 


Issued Warrant No. 


Amount 




Airola & Williams 










Dietrich, Attys 


12-20-84 


530-0390195 


$3,000.00 




Blue Shield of California/ 










Blue Cross 


1-25-85 


550-2010081 


2,833.01 




Fox Industries Sales 


8-19-84 


550-2302774 


796.34 




Neyhart, Anderson, Nussbaum, 










Reilly & Freitas 


12-20-84 


530-0390381 


2,030.00 




Pro-Pak, Inc. 


10-16-86 


530-0528717 


975.81 




Wilson Sporting Goods Co. 


6-14-85 


550-2022767 


1,825.71 




W. Scott De Bie 


11-16-84 


550-0383424 


1.476.00 




Total 






$12,936.87 


Comments: 


1. As reflected above, the re 


quested w 


arrants are b 


etween six 



and eight years old. Ms. Evelyn Alava of the Controller's 
Office of Special Projects states that all of the above payees 
were approached by Nelson-Brown Equities, Inc., a private 
legal firm, to assist the payees in making a claim against the 
unpaid warrants. Mr. Henry Leigh of the Controller's Office 
advises that Nelson-Brown Equities, Inc. would collect a fee 
from the above parties for their services. 

2. According to Ms. Alava, all of the payees report that they 
did not receive their warrants, and have requested that those 
warrants be reissued. 

3. Ms. Alava advises that the Controller's Office 
automatically cancelled these seven warrants, which had not 
been cashed one year after the original issue date. The 
Controller's Office has verified that it has made no payment 
on these seven warrants, Ms. Alava reports. 

4. In December, 1991, the Finance Committee denied a 
proposed resolution (File 23-91-4) waiving the statute of 
limitations with respect to payment of certain warrants 
because the payees had been approached by Nelson-Brown 
Equities, Inc., who would have collected 50 percent of the 
warrant amount in fees. In April, 1992, the Finance 
Committee denied another payment requested by another 
private legal firm, WJ Jas Assets (File 23-92-3). In May, 1992, 
the Finance Committee denied another payment requested by 
the legal firm of Nelson Brown Equities, Inc. (File 23-92-5). 
Ms. Celeste Bell of the City Attorney's Office reports that 
Nelson-Brown Equities has filed a lawsuit against the City 
and that the Superior Court is in the process of deciding 
whether the City is mandated to pay any expired warrant 
upon request. As of the writing of this report, the litigation is 
at the discovery stage, with the Controller's Office providing a 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 






Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

substantial amount of documentation, and a trial date has 
been set for October 5, 1992. 

5. According to Mr. Henry Leigh of the Controller's Office, 
the City and County of San Francisco have sufficient funds to 
pay $12,936.87 to the above payees. Mr. Leigh reports that, 
when a warrant is automatically cancelled, the funds revert 
back to the specific account from which it was originally 
drawn. 

6. Based on the Finance Committee's previous denial of 
legislation noted in Comment 4 above, which is similar to the 
proposed legislation, the Budget Analyst believes that the 
proposed resolution should not be approved. 

Recommendation: Do not approve the proposed resolution based on the 
Committee's previous denial of similar legislation. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item lb - File 25-92-22 



Department: 
Item: 



Services to 
be Performed: 



Description: 



Police Department 

Resolution concurring with the Controller's Certification of 
Costs required by Charter Section 8.300-1 (Proposition J) that 
certain services can continue to be practically performed by a 
private contractor for a lower cost than similar services 
performed by the City and County of San Francisco. 



Janitorial Services for all nine District Police stations, the 
Police Academy, the Pistol Range, and the Golden Gate 
stables. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for these 
janitorial services in fiscal year 1992-99 would result in 
estimated savings as follows: 





Lowest 


Highest 




Salary 


Salary 


Citv Operated Service Costs 


Step 


Step 


Salary 


$257,920 


$311,791 


Holiday Pay 


58,032 


70,153 


Night Duty 


4,127 


4,989 


Fringe Benefits 


89,654 


103,527 


Non-Labor Costs 


35,000 


35,000 


DPW Overhead 


429.034 


506.911 


Total 


$873,767 


$1,032,371 


Contracted Service Cost 


377.196 


377.196 


Estimated Savings 


$496,571 


$655,175 



Comments: 1. In January 1992, in response to warnings from the Public 

Health Department about poor sanitation conditions at the 
since vacated Hibernia Bank building, the Board of 
Supervisors approved an emergency procurement for the 
Police Department to contract with a firm to provide 
janitorial services for the Hibernia Bank Building, 
(Administrative Code Section 21.25). Because of an 
anticipated desire to contract for private janitorial services 
for the rest of their facilities in the future, the Police 
Department took the two contractors who were bidding on the 
job at the Hibernia Bank Building on a walkthrough of all of 
the Police Department facilities to obtain an additional 
contracted service cost estimate. The Contracted Service Cost 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



estimate is an average of the two contractor's bids which 
were based on the walkthrough of all of the facilities 
excluding the Hibernia Bank building and the Hall of Justice. 

2. According to Tom Strong of the Police Department's 
Accounting Office, the Police Department has budgeted 
$33,796 in their FY 1992-93 budget to pay the Department of 
Public Works to provide janitorial services during the period 
of July 1, 1992 to July 31, 1992. This would prevent a lapse in 
service as the Police Department is still in the process of 
selecting a private contractor. The Department of Public 
Works has provided these janitorial services to the Police 
Department through FY 1992-93. 

3. FY 1992-93 would be the first year that the Police 
Department would fully contract for these janitorial services. 

4. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses, including MBE/WBE status is 
attached. Since the Police Department is still in the process 
of selecting a contractor, the MBE/WBE status is unknown. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



rv i_ Ld^i 



Charter 8.300-1 {Proposition J) Questionnaire 
Department ^ an Francisco Police Department 
Contract Services jar.itorial Service 
Time Period 

1) Who performed services prior to contracting out? 
Pepar tmp.nt of, "Public Works Janitorial. 

2) Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting 
out? 

None, these employees should easily be absorbed into DPW 
operations. y 

3) Explain disposition of employees if they were laid off. 

These employees can find employment. **» federal, state, and 
private sectors. 

4) What percent of City employee's time is spent on services to be 
contracted out? 

100% 

5) How long have services been contracted out? 

These services have been performed by. -the Department of 
Public Works. 

6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J 
Certification? 

It is anticipated to commence by 1992-1993. 

7) How will contract services meet the goals of y6ur MBE/WBS 
Action Plan? 

The competitive bid process will insure compliance. 
Pteeent contractor at the Hibernia Bank Police Building is 

mbe/lbe. 



■^TL^. 




Department/Representative MICHAEL J. SULLIVAN 

SERGEANT OF POLICE 



(Type Name, Title) 



Telephone 
cxlquesp j 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item lc -File 25-92-23 



Department 
Item: 



Services to 
be Performed: 

Description: 



Comments: 



Department of Public Health, San Francisco General 
Hospital 

Resolution concurring with Controller's Certification of 
Costs required by Charter Section 8.300-1 (Proposition J) that 
certain services can continue to be practically performed by a 
private contractor for a lower cost than similar services 
performed by the City and County of San Francisco. 



Security Services for Psychiatry-Substance Abuse Services 

The Controller has determined that contracting for these 
security services in fiscal year 1992-93 would result in 
estimated savings as follows: 



City Operated Service Costs 

Salary 

Hobday Pay and Night Duty 
Fringe Benefits 
Uniforms 
Total 

Contracted Service Cost 

Estimated Savings 



Lowest 

Salary 

Step 

$6,708 

1,064 

2,176 

227 

$10,175 

5.123 

$5,052 



Highest 

Salary 

Step 

$8,133 

1,294 

2,640 

227 

$12,294 

5.123 

$7,171 



1. Security Services were first certified as required by 
Charter Section 8.300-1 in 1983 and have been continuously 
provided by an outside contractor since then. 

2. Security Services were performed by Cal State Patrol 
Service during FY 1991-92. Mr. Thomas Mosmiller, Director 
of Operations at San Francisco General Hospital, reports that 
the Security Services contract with Cal State Patrol was 
renewed for FY 1992-93. Cal State Patrol Service is a City 
certified MBE. 

3. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses, including MBE/WBE status is 
attached. 

4. The estimated Contracted Service Cost for 1992-93 is based 
on a cost estimate reported by Cal State Patrol. 



BQARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

7 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



\Jl-o--'- 



I Y^fo 1 ^-Attachment 



CHARTER S. 200-1 (Proposition J) QUESTIONNAIRE 



Department Psychiatry - Substance Abuse Services 



Contract Services Security Guard Services 



For the term starting approximately _ ?/1 /92 through, 6/30/93 

1) Who performed services prior to contracting out? 

These services have always been contracted out. 

2) Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting out? 

None. 

3) Explain disposition of employees if they were not laid off. 

No city employee have ever been hired for this service. 

4) What percent of a City employee's time is spent on services to be 
contracted out? 

None. 

5) How long have the services been contracted out? 

Nine years. 

6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J Certification? 

FY '83-' 84. 

7) How will contract services meet the goals of your MBE/WBE Action Plan? 

The vendor is a minority owned business. 



1 




Department Represe' tat i ve 



le'ephone 206-8764 



-r C2/;/ r '^ 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item Id - File 101-91-38.2 



Department 
Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description 



San Francisco Public Library 

Request for release of reserved funds for Library 
Management Services, salaries and fringe benefits. 

$214,380 

1988 Library Improvement Bond Fund 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved a 
supplemental appropriation ordinance (File 101-91-38) for 
$4,015,003, which reserved a total of $1,529,805. These 
reserved funds totalling $1,529,805 included the requested 
$214,380 for Library Management Services. 

The requested $214,380 in reserved funds would provide 
Library Management Services for existing Public Library 
staff to coordinate and manage the new Main Library project 
for FY 1992-93. These reserved funds would specifically be 
used as follows: 



Personnel (FY 1992-93) 
3638 Chief Librarian 
3632 Librarian II 
1446 Secretary 

Subtotal Personnel 

Fringe Benefits (approximately 26 percent 
of Personnel) 

Total 



$ 80,080 
53,637 
36.426 

$170,143 



44.237 
$214,380 



Comments: 1. The $214,380 in Library Improvement Bond Funds were 

reserved pending salary standardization increases for FY 
1992-93. As previously reported in the Budget Analyst's 
report on the effect of the Mayor's recommended reductions 
in the Public Library's 1992-93 budget (File 220-92-1), the 
average salary standardization increase for Public Library 
staff for FY 1992-93, including pay equity adjustments, 
ranged between 10 and 13 percent, which is higher than the 
approximate 8.7 percent average increase for all City 
departments. The above-listed request for release of reserved 
funds includes these salary standardization increases. 



KOARI) OF St JPKRVtSOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

2. According to Ms. Kathy Page of the Public Library, these 
above-listed existing bond funded positions, which would be 
funded through the requested release of reserve, would be 
phased out and eliminated during FY 1995-96 as the 
availability of bond funds decreases and the new Main 
Library project nears completion 

Recommendation: Release the reserved funds in the amount of $214,380. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July, 8 1992 

Item le - File 133-90-1.7 



Department 

Item: 

Amount: 
Description: 



Budget 



Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) 
Solid Waste Management Program 

Release of reserved funds for hauling services, for a project 
entitled Milkrun/Service for Small Businesses in the City. 

150,000 

The Board of Supervisors previously placed on reserve a total 
of $325,000 for the various components of the Solid Waste 
Management Program, (File 133-90-1). 

Of the total $325,000 of reserved funds, $150,000 was reserved 
pending the selection of contractors and information 
regarding hours, rates and the MBE/WBE status for a milk 
run program for small quantity generators (SQG) of 
hazardous materials. A SQG is a business which generates 
no more than 2,200 pounds or 270 gallons of hazardous waste 
per month. The types of hazardous waste generated by SQGs 
include dry cleaning filtration residues, and solvents from 
printing companies, photography labs, and gas stations. 
Many of these SQGs lack the technical expertise or the 
financial resources to dispose of their hazardous waste. 
Therefore, the requested $150,000 of funds would be used to 
provide "milk runs" for SQGs which would involve a 
hazardous waste hauler going from business to business to 
pick up and dispose of the hazardous waste at landfills. 

The Solid Waste Management Program selected H&H 
Environmental Service Company as one of two respondents 
in a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. The contractor was 
chosen by a five person committee in compliance with HRC 
requirements. 



Personnel 


Rate 
$65.00 


Hours 
211 


Total 


Program Manager 


$13,720 


Sales/Marketing 


65.00 


171 


11,130 


Clerical 


30.00 


127 


3,820 


Chemist 


65.00 


75 


4,880 


Health and Safety 


40.00 


81 


3,230 


Hazmat Field 








Personnel 


$40.00 


248 


9,928 


Subtotal Personnel 




913 


$46,708 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July, 8 1992 



Comments: 



Field Equipment and Material 




Non revenue Vehicles 


$300 


Rev. Vehicles 


11,250 


Personal Protective 




Equipment 


1,575 



Total Field Equipment 
and Material 

Disposal Costs 
Latex Based Paint Liquids 
Oil Based Paint Liquids 
Oil Based Paint Sludge 
Solvents and Thinners 
Other Misc. Wastestreams 
Total Disposal Costs 



$35,836 

20,425 

16,056 

10,750 

6.300 



Miscellaneous Office and Administrative Costs 

Courier/Postage 100 

Reproduction/Printing 100 

Telephone/Facsimile 200 

Computer/Desktop Publishing 400 
Total Misc Office and Admin. Costs 

Total Project Budget 



$13,125 



89,367 



$150,000 



1. Although these funds were placed on reserve in FY 1991- 
92, Ms. Elahe Enssani of the Solid Waste Management 
Program reports that these funds have been carried over to 
FY 1992-93 from FY 1991-92. The $150,000 as reserved for 
contractual services would be performed from approximately 
July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. 

2. H&H Environmental Service Company is not a City 
certified MBE or WBE. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed release of reserve. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item If - File 146-91-83.3 



Note: Although the July 8, 1992 Finance Calendar indicates that the request for 
release of reserve is for $33,944, the Department of Public Health, AIDS 
Office is requesting a total of $103,944 be released from reserve for four 
specific projects. 

Department Department of Public Health (DPH) 

AIDS Office 



Item: 



Amount: 



Source of Funds: 



Description: 



Request for release of reserved funds to establish an HIV 
education and prevention program for intravenous drug 
users, an HIV prevention and education program directed 
towards gay and bisexual Asian and Pacific Islander men, 
supplemental funds to enhance the previously approved 
Interactive Video Kiosk project for HIV/AIDS prevention, 
(File 146-91-83.1) and an AIDS prevention program targeted 
predominantly towards the African American population 
living in the Tenderloin area of San Francisco. 

$103,944 

Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for 
Disease Control (CDC) 

The Board of Supervisors previously authorized the 
Department of Public Health (DPH) to accept and expend a 
continuation grant of $6,099,135 from the Federal Department 
of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control, 
and reserved a total of $449,069 pending the selection of 
contractors, information regarding hours and rates, and the 
MBE/WBE status of the contractors. Of the $449,069 reserved, 
$347,159 was reserved for the Survey of Knowledge, Attitudes, 
Behaviors and Beliefs. Since no more than $33,464 is needed 
for the Survey, DPH is requesting the remaining funds be 
released for other projects. Of the remaining $313,695. 
($347,159 - $33,464), DPH would like to release $33,944 for the 
Urban Health Study, $30,000 for the Asian and Pacific 
Islander Consortium on AIDS (APICAVGay Asian Pacific 
Alliance Community HIV Project (GAPA), $30,000 for the 
National Task Force on AIDS Prevention enhancement of the 
Interactive Video Kiosk project, and $10,000 for the Glide 
Foundation, which are the subjects of the proposed request. 

The reserved funds in the amount of $33,944 would be used by 
the contractor, Urban Health Study, to provide tuberculosis 
testing, clinical evaluation, and prevention education for 
suspected and confirmed HIV positive injection drug users. 
An arrangement has been made with Dr. Gisella Schecter at 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



San Francisco General Hospital that both suspected and 
confirmed HIV positive clients would be referred to the 
Tuberculosis Clinic at San Francisco General Hospital, and 
would receive referrals, education and counseling, X-rays, 
medication, clinical evaluation, and follow-up. Because of 
this arrangement, the contractor would be able to gather data 
regarding the outcomes of referrals and information 
pertaining to clinical evaluation of injection drug users. 

The AIDS Office selected the contractor, The Urban Health 
Study, under a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. The 
Urban Health Study was one of five respondents and was 
selected by a Selection Review Committee because of their 
overall viability to perform the necessary service. The Urban 
Health Study would use the reserved funds for the following: 

Personnel FTE 

Program Coordinator .25 $6,085 

Community Health Outreach 

Worker " .15 3,455 

Community Health Outreach 
Worker 
Subtotal 

Fringe Benefits @ 26% 
Total Personnel 

Operating Expenditures 
Van Rental 

Respondent Stipends (1,100 at $10 each) 
Staff Training 
Materials and Supplies 
Total Operating Expenses 

Total Project Budget $33,944 

The reserved funds in the amount of $30,000 would be used by 
the contractor, Asian and Pacific Islander Consortium on 
AIDS (APICA)/Gay Asian Pacific Alliance Community HIV 
Project (GAPA) to increase outreach, intake, scheduling, and 
follow-up services to Asian and Pacific Islander gay and 
bisexual men. This would be done through "prevention case 
management" which would ensure that the members of this 
population would be connected to an appropriate risk- 
reduction support system. APICA/GAPA would also 
organize outreach and special events, as well as develop a 
young men's "rap" series on responsible sex, dating, and 
relationships. 

The AIDS Office selected the Contractor, APICA/GAPA 
under a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. APICA/GAPA 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



.15 


3,455 

$12,995 

3.379 




.55 


$3,840 

11,000 

2,230 

500 


$16,374 
17.570 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



was one of seven respondents and was chosen by a Selection 

Review Committee because of their overall viability to 

perform the necessary service. APICA/GAPA would use the 

reserved funds for the following: 

Personnel FTE 

Health Educator 1.5 $18,000 

Fringe Benefits @ 23% 4.140 

Total Personnel $22,140 

Operating Expenses 

Language Consultation $780 

Insurance 350 

Printing and Reproduction 180 

Rental of Equipment 178 

Rental of Property 1,200 

Training 150 

Travel 190 

Utilities 340 

Office Supplies and Postage 678 

Educational Supplies 600 

Total Operating Expenses $4,646 

Indirect Costs @ 12% of Direct Expenses 3.214 

TOTAL Project Budget $30,000 

The reserved funds in the amount of $30,000 would be used by 
the contractor, the National Task Force on AIDS Prevention 
to enhance the previously approved amount of $30,000 for the 
development of the Interactive Video Kiosk. The funds would 
be used for the further development and refinement of the 
program content as well as research and development for 
improved software and hardware. The funds would also be 
used for advertising to promote the kiosk through the news 
media, to develop posters and displays. The National Task 
Force on AIDS Prevention would use the reserved funds for 
the following: 



Personnel 


FTE 




Fees (for the 






development and refine- 






ment of the program) 


NA 


$24,030 


Executive Director 


.02 


1,200 


Operations Manager 


.02 


soo 


Subtotal 




$26,030 


Fringe Benefits 




470 


Total Personnel 


.04 




Operating Expenditures 






Advertising 




2,500 


BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 







$26,500 



BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Program Supplies 1.000 

Total Operating Expenditures $3.500 

TOTAL Project Budget $30,000 

The reserved funds in the amount of $10,000 would be used by 
the contractor, the Glide Foundation, to offset the salary of the 
Project Coordinator who is responsible for the daily activities of 
the Glide AIDS Project. The AIDS Project provides AIDS 
prevention education through street based outreach 
interventions to adult residents (60 percent of whom are 
African American) living in the Tenderloin area of San 
Francisco. Specific efforts would be made to target gay and 
bisexual males, injection drug users, sexual partners of 
injection drug users, and people who exchange sex for drugs. 

The AIDS Office selected the contractor under a Request for 
Proposal (RFP) process. The Glide Foundation was one of two 
respondents and was chosen by a Selection Review Committee 
because of their overall viability to perform the necessary 
service. The Glide Foundation would use the reserved funds for 
the following: 

Personnel FTE 

Project Coordinator .50 $8,000 

Fringe Benefits @25% 2.000 

TOTAL Project Budget $10,000 



Comments: 1. Mr. Tim Piland at the Aids Office reports that each of the 

four contractors, Urban Health Study, APICA/GAPA, National 
Task Force on AIDS Prevention, and the Glide Foundation are 
non-profit organizations. 

2. Mr. Piland reports that the Urban Health Study's 
contractual services would be performed from approximately 
January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992. It is anticipated 
that 300-350 clients will be served through this program. Mr. 
Galen Leung of the AIDS Office reports that the contractor has 
been providing services since January, 1992 without being paid 
in an effort to respond to the rise in tuberculosis patients. 
Therefore, this proposed release of reserve would include 
retroactive funding for the contractor. 

3. Mr. Piland reports that APICA/GAPA's contractual 
services would be performed from approximately July 1, 1992 
through December 31, 1992. It is anticipated that 
approximately 210 persons will receive "prevention case 
management." 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

4. Mr. Piland reports that although the Finance Committee 
previously approved legislation to release reserves to the 
National Task Force on AIDS Prevention for the establishment 
of the Interactive Video Kiosk, (File 146-91-83.1), the Federal 
Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for 
Disease Control, (CDC) did not approve this project. Therefore, 
since the funds to establish the program were not approved by 
the grantor, the current request to release reserves for the 
enhancement of this project is no longer necessary. The 
legislation should be amended to not release the funds in the 
amount of $30,000 for the enhancement of the Interactive Video 
Kiosk. 

5. Mr. Piland Reports that the Glide Foundation's contractual 
services would be performed from approximately July 1, 1992 
through December 31, 1992. It is anticipated that 
approximately 4,622 unduplicated persons would utilize the 
services provided by the Glide Foundation's AIDS Project. 

6. Mr. Piland indicates that a release of reserved funds is 
requested for the projects described above which were originally 
reserved, under Resolution No. 1092-91, for the Survey of 
Knowledge, Attitudes, Behaviors, and Beliefs (File No. 146-91- 
83). Mr. Piland indicates that an error occurred in reserving 
$347,159 for the Survey, since the Survey's budget was only 
$33,464, and that excess funds were therefore reserved in the 
amount of $313,695. DPH is therefore requesting that $103,944 of 
these excess reserve funds be applied for the projects described 
above. (As noted above, $30,000 of the request is no longer 
needed.) The Budget Analyst believes that such a release of 
funds originally reserved for the Survey of Knowledge, 
Attitudes, Behaviors, and Beliefs is a policy matter for the 
Board of Supervisors. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the total amount of release of reserved funds from 
$103,944 to $73,944 since it is no longer necessary to release 
the amount of $30,000 for the enhancement of the Interactive 
Video Kiosk. 

2. Include retroactive funding in the proposed release of 
reserve for The Urban Health Study which has been 
providing services since January, 1992. 

3. Approval of the proposed release of reserves is a policy 
matter for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

18 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lgr - File 79-91-2.4 

Department Mayor's Office of Economic Planning and Development 

Item: Release of reserved funds for the Enterprise Zone Program 

Amount: $63,465 



Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Comments: 



Community Development Block Grant Funds 

In December 9, 1991, the Board of Supervisors approved the 
City's 1992 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) 
Program (File 79-91-2) in an amount of $20,093,535. At the 
same time, the Board of Supervisors placed $63,465 for the 
Enterprise Zone Coordinator position on reserve, pending the 
Civil Service Commission review and approval of the 
position. 

The staff of the Civil Service Commission Classification Unit 
have reviewed the job description for the Enterprise Zone 
Coordinator and have given their approval for the subject 
position to be classified as a 9792 Assistant to the Mayor VI. 
The 1992-93 standardized amount for this position, which is a 
single step position, is $70,183 annually. 

1. The Board of Supervisors previously approved legislation 
establishing an Enterprise Zone in San Francisco (File 248- 
91-1). The Enterprise Zone is aimed at (1) providing 
employment for the City's economically disadvantaged 
population, (2) stimulating private investment in 
communities considered to be economically depressed and (3) 
encouraging business retention and attraction in 
economically depressed areas. The goals of the San 
Francisco Enterprise Zone Program are to retain existing 
businesses, attract new businesses, diversify the City's 
economic base and increase the City's tax base. San 
Francisco's Enterprise Zone is designed to stimulate 
economic development through the use of tax incentives such 
as State tax credits and business and financial services 
which will be available to businesses located in the Enterprise 
Zone. 

2. San Francisco's Enterprize Zone covers approximately 
12,800 businesses in the following nine neighborhoods: South 
Bayshore/Bayview Hunters Point, the Mission, the Mission 
Hay Project area, South of Market, Potrero Hill, Tenderloin, 
Chinatown, Western Addition and Haight Ashbury District. 

3. Under the direction of the Director of the Mayor's Office of 
Economic Planning and Development, the Enterprise Zone 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Coordinator would be responsible for the planning, design, 
implementation, marketing, staff training, monitoring and 
evaluation of the San Francisco Enterprise Zone Program. 

4. The Mayor's Office reports that contingent upon the 
Finance Committee's approval of the proposed release of 
reserve funds, the Enterprise Zone Coordinator position 
would be filled effective August 1, 1992. The $63,465 
represents 10 months of salary ($58,490) and Fringe Benefits 
($4,975 or 8.5%). Only 8.5% is included for Fringe Benefits 
because this position is a limited tenure position and is 
eligible for health benefits only. However, since the 
Community Development Block Grant Program funds were 
allocated for calendar year 1992, only $31,730 ($29,245 salaries 
plus $2,485 in Fringe Benefits) would be required, at this 
time, to fund this position for a five-month period (August 1, 
1992 to December 31, 1992). Therefore, the Budget Analyst 
recommends that $31,730 of the $63,465 placed on reserve be 
released and the remaining balance of $31,735 continue to be 
reserved. 

5. Mr. Bernhard Gunther of the Mayor's Office reports that 
funds to pay for this position for calendar year 1993 would be 
included in the 1993 CDBG budget request. 

Recommendation: Release $31,730 of the $63,465 placed on reserve and continue 
to reserve the remaining balance of $31,735. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lh - File 100-91-1.29 



Department: 

Item: 
Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Description 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH) 

Request for release of reserved funds for contractual services. 

$750,000 

SFGH's 1991-92 budget, which is funded through various 
revenues (approximately 68 percent) and through a General 
Fund subsidy (approximately 32 percent). 

During the 1991-92 budget process, the Board of Supervisors 
recommended to reserve $750,000 of a $1.5 million contract for 
services provided by Health Management Systems, Inc. 
(HMS) for Comprehensive Account Management Services 
(CAMS), which is an electronic bill processing services. At 
the time the Board of Supervisors approved the contract (172- 
90-26) with HMS, there was uncertainty regarding whether 
or not the utilization of the CAMS System would result in 
increased revenues, and therefore the Board of Supervisors 
requested that SFGH submit an evaluation on increased 
revenues achieved after six months, prior to releasing the 
$750,000 in funding for the remaining six months of the 
contract. This proposed request for release of reserved funds 
transmits this six month review of electronic bill processing 
services to the Board of Supervisors. 

The HMS contract term began on July 1, 1991 and expires on 
June 30, 1994. Under the provisions of the contract, HMS is 
responsible for the installation of the CAMS system computer 
hardware, on-site training of SFGH staff and coordinating 
the CAMS system interface with SFGH's Management 
Information Systems (MIS). Once the CAMS system has been 
implemented, HMS would provide on-site support staff at 
SFGH, as necessary to answer questions, provide ongoing 
staff training and resolve problems. 

The CAMS system processes the following types of claims: 

(1) Inpatient and outpatient Medi-Cal claims. 

(2) Inpatient and outpatient Medicare claims, including 
psychiatric claims. 

(3) Inpatient and outpatient insurance claims to all carriers 
who accept electronic media claims. 

(4) Outpatient Child Health Development (CH DP) claims. 

BOARD OK SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



(5) Medi-Cal outpatient Pharmacy claims. 

(6) Automated Doctors First Report of Injury forms for 
California Workers Compensation accounts. 

(7) Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) 1500 Part 
B claims. 

SFGH reports that increased revenues would result from the 
HMS contract because the CAMS system would reduce all 
denied or rejected claims by 50 percent. In addition, the State 
rejects certain Medi-Cal claims because the ocular readers 
(viewing devices used to read the information on claim 
forms) have difficulty reading manually prepared claims. 

Comments: 1. Under the contract with HMS for electronic claims 

processing, the City's cost does not exceed 12.5 percent of 
revenues collected, but in no event can the City's cost exceed 
$1.5 million annually. For FY 1991-92, the City owes HMS a 
total of $1.5 million because the revenues collected exceeded 
the $1.5 million maximum payable limit. 

2. SFGH indicates that under the current contract with 
HMS, the following benefits have been provided: 

• Accelerated cash flow, as turnaround time for processing 
claims is more rapid through computerized claims 
processing rather than for processing paper claims; 

• Increased productivity of SFGH billing staff, by automating 
the billing of large volumes of claims, particularly large 
outpatient volumes due to high volume climes at SFGH; 

• Reduction in the number of initial denied claims, from a 
denial rate of approximately 20 percent to less than five 
percent; 

• Elimination of intermediary keypunch errors in processing 
of paper claims; 

• Reduced Accounts Receivable, as claims are paid more 
quickly; 

• Job enrichment for SFGH Patient Accounting personnel, 
as technology is integrated into the patient accounting work 
place; 

• Decreased need for retention and storage of paper records; 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

22 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



3. SFGH reports that the following revenues would be 
provided to SFGH through the HMS contract as compared 
with revenues provided in 1990, which is used as a baseline 
year because it was prior to the implementation of the HMS 
electronic claims processing system: 

Adjusted Medi-Cal 

Collections (FY 1991-92) $35,108,756 

HMS Fees (FY 1991-92) 1.500.000 

Net Adjusted Medi-Cal Collections, 

after $1.5 million payment to contractor $33,608,756 
Less 1990 (Baseline) Net Adjusted 

Medi-Cal Collections 32.068.337 

Revenues in Excess of 1990 (Baseline) 
net of $1.5 million payment to contractor $1,540,419 

As noted above, under the HMS contract, HMS's projected 
performance for FY 1991-92, based upon actual collections for 
six months, is anticipated to exceed the 1990 Baseline by 
$1,540,419. Other revenues from Medicare, and private 
insurance claims have not yet been fully documented, but the 
overall revenues generated by the electronic claims 
processing system would be in excess of the $1,540,419. 
Therefore, without the HMS contract, SFGH reports that a 
minimum of $1.5 million in revenues would be lost annually. 

4. The proposed request for release of reserved funds would 
fund the HMS contract for services provided for a six month 
period beginning approximately January 1, 1992 through 
June 30, 1992. According to Mr. Peter Praetz of SFGH, HMS 
has continued to be paid through April, 1992 with other 
budgeted funds for contractual services. According to Mr. 
Richard Cordova of SFGH, due to a departmental oversight, 
SFGH has not previously submitted a six month review of 
increased revenues achieved, nor requested the release of the 
reserved funds prior to the incurring of these contractual 
obligations. 

5. Therefore, because these contractual obligations have 
already been incurred and payments have previously been 
made through April, 1992, the request for release of reserved 
funds should be amended to authorize the retroactive 
payment of funds. In addition, given that SFGH did not 
submit the six month review of increased revenues achieved 
prior to when the contractual obligations have been incurred 
and payments have been made to HMS, the Budget. Analyst 
believes that approval of the proposed request for release of 
reserved funds is a policy matter for the Hoard of Supervisors. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
23 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



6. HMS, which is located in New York, NY, was selected 
through a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. HMS is 
neither an MBE or WBE firm. 

Recommendation: Approval of the request for release of reserved funds, which 
would provide payment to Health Management Services 
(HMS) on a retroactive basis, is a policy matter for the Board 
of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

24 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item li -File 68-92-8 

Department: 

Item: 



Description; 
Source of Funds: 

Grant Period: 
Project Title: 

Project Description: 



Mayor's Criminal Justice Council 

Resolution authorizing the Mayor of the City and County 
of San Francisco to apply for, accept and expend new 
Federal grant funds in the amount of $35,991 made 
available through the Office of Criminal Justice Planning, 
and agreeing to provide matching funds in the amount of 
$3,599. 

$35,991 

Federal funds through the California Office of Criminal 
Justice Planning (OCJP) 

July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Gang Prevention Program GVSP (Gang Violence 
Suppression Program) 

The Gang Prevention Program GVSP would be 
administered by the Mayor's Criminal Justice Council 
Gang Prevention Program. The Program would provide 
Gang Prevention Education Curriculum at four middle 
schools (Potrero Hill, Martin Luther King, James 
Denman, and Herbert Hoover) and two high schools 
(McAteer and Mission), for students ages 12-18. The 
Mayor's Office reports that the Gang Prevention 
Education Curriculum is based on a low-risk lifestyle 
reduction model which is founded on the belief that 
students are more likely to make sound choices about 
gangs and drugs under the following circumstances: 

1) Students understand that they have choices. 

2) Students become aware of what behavior choices tend 
to increase their risks of gang involvement. 

3) Environmental influences (i.e., school policy, peer 
support, parental expectations) that encourage low- 
risk options are maximized and negative 
environmental influences that encourage high-risk 
options are minimized. 

4) Internal influences (attitudes, values, self-concept) 
that encourage low-risk options are maximized and 
internal influences that encourage hi^h-risk options 
are minimized. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Project Budget: 



5) Students realize that all situations provide 
opportunities for learning the skills that are 
necessary for choosing and using low-risk options. 

The Gang Prevention Education Curriculum would be 
organized into 45 to 60 minute sessions which would be 
conducted by the Gang Prevention Education Specialist, a 
Police Officer or a classroom teacher. One session per 
week would be held at each of the four middle schools and 
the two high schools. The curriculum would be aimed at 
building self-esteem, enhancing personal skills, and 
stressing behavioral options. The curriculum would 
include group discussion, role playing, written exercises, 
problem solving techniques as well as other activities. 
Students would be referred to the Gang Prevention 
Education Curriculum Program by community-based 
organization casemanagers, the Juvenile Probation 
Department, the Unified School District and the 
Department of Social Services. 



Personnel 
Gang Prevention 

Education Specialist 
Fringe Benefits 
Subtotal 

Operating Expenses 
Consultant Services 
Audit 

Subtotal 

Indirect Costs 

Total 



$29,566 
2.648 



$5,000 
396 



$32,214 



5,396 

1.980 

$39,590* 



*The $39,590 total project amount includes the proposed 
grant amount of $35,991 plus $3,599 in required match. 



Required Match: 
Indirect Costs: 
Comments: 



$3,599, which is included in the Mayor's 1992-93 budget. 
$1,980 (5.5% of total grant) 

1. The Mayor's Office advises that if grant funds are 
terminated or reduced, grant personnel will be 
terminated or reduced accordingly. 

2. The application deadline for this grant is July 1, 1992. 
Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended to 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



26 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

authorize the Department to apply for the proposed grant 
retroactively. 

3. Reference to indirect costs in the amount of $1,980 is 
included in the body of the legislation but not in the title of 
the legislation. Therefore, the proposed legislation should 
be amended to reference indirect costs in the amount of 
$1,980 in the title of the legislation. 

4. Attached is the "Summary of Grant Request", as 
prepared by the Mayor's Office, for the proposed grant. 

5. A Disability Access Checklist has been prepared by the 
Department and is included in the file. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed legislation to (1) authorize the 

Department to apply for the proposed grant retroactively 
and (2) reference indirect costs in the amount of $1,980 in 
the title of the proposed legislation and approve the 
proposed legislation as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

27 



AtLacrmieuL 



iVte- No. MAVQ R'S OFFICE . Summary of Gr - t Request 

Grat . tor Office of Criminal Justice Plan ning Division Mayor 



Rev. 4/10/90 



Contact Person 01 in Jones Section Criminal Justice Cnunn'1 

Address 1130 K Street, Suite 300 contact Person Joyce 0. Smith 

Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone (415) 554-6561 

Amount Requested S 35,991 Application Deadline June 3, 1991 

Term: From 7/1/92 To 6/30/93 Notification Expected July 1 , 199? 

Health Commission Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Board 



I. Item Description; Request to (apply for) (accept and expend) a (new) (continuation) (allocation) (augmentation to a) 
(cwc ^™* —*) granl m [he amount of $ 35,991 from the period of 07/01/92 to 06/30/93 

to pmviriF: administration of the Gang Prevention Education services. 

Cirriculum 

' Sumrn3rVt ( C—vx/bixx—r. Deed Ml A^a acd; mnsbcT # jrcmf» loved; «crvicc» sod provufcr» ) 

The Gang Prevention Education Curriculum is a project nf t.hp Gang Prevpntion Program a I 
is designed to prevent gang involvempnt among the children and youth in t.hp City and "CI 

of San Francisco. The emphas is is to help studpnts recognizp the int.prnal and pxtPrna 

influences that encourage choosing low-risk options or hphavinr ovpr high risk nprinnc, 
Tn addition , the program st.rat.pgips arp ha spH nn t.hp hplipf that, pnhanring spI f-psf pphi 
tit. Outcomes/Objectives: skill building, and risk reduction enables a student to make sou 

The curriculum to be used is based on a low-risk lifestyle reduction model. chcc 

The curriculum will be implemented in four middle schools and one high school. The 
Gang Prevention Education Curriculum will conduct the sessions and will train peer f acv 
tators to assist in implementation. 

TV. Effects of Reduction or Termination of These Funds: 

The program would be reduced or terminated . 



V. Financial Information: 

Col. A Co). B Col. C Col. D Reg. Match Approved by 

Two Years Ago Past Year/Orig. Proposed Change 

Grant Amount $35,991 $-3.599 

Personnel 28.993 .3,221 



Equipment 

'Contract Svc. 4.500 F00 

Mat. & Supp. 



Facilities/Space 

Other AUDIT 356 j _____ _ 

Indirect Costs 1.782 { 198 

VI. Data Processing 

(ec»o tneroded «bo-vc) 

VII. Personnel 

F/T CSC 

P/T CSC 



N/A 



Contractual \ 

Source(s) of non-grant funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this grant: 



Will grant funded employees he retained after this grant terminates? If so, How? 

Contingent on the availability of other funding. 



* V HL — Co n tractus ] — Scr v lC£K Open Bid Sole Source. (^^^«.^a,fo s „« ( p.E Jrap uooF-=.) 

28 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item li - File 130-92-3 

Department: Adult Probation 

Item: Resolution authorizing the Chief Adult Probation Officer of 

the City and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and 
expend continuation State grant funds in the amount of 
$105,055, and agreeing to provide matching funds in the 
amount of $11,673. 

Amount: $105,055 

Source of Funds: California Office of Criminal Justice Planning 

Grant Period: July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 



Project Title: 

Project 
Description 



Gang Caseload Component of the Intensive Services Unit 



The proposed grant funds would be used by the Adult 
Probation Department primarily to fund two Senior 
Probationer Officer positions to provide intensive supervision 
and surveillance to enforce the conditions of high risk 
offenders on probation for gang-related activities. This grant 
had previously funded only one Senior Probation Officer. The 
Senior Probation Officers would work closely with the Police 
Department, the District Attorney's Office and various 
treatment providers to provide probationers with drug 
treatment and other rehabilitative services. The program's 
objective is to lower the recidivism of probationers assigned to 
this grant funded program either through rehabilitation or 
their prompt incarceration if they commit probation 
violations. 



No. of Persons 
Served: 

Grant Budget: 



Two caseloads of up to 50 adult probationers 



Personnel 

Two Senior Probation Officers (1.80 FTE) 
Fringe Benefits 
Subtotal 



$91,845 
5.042 



$9ti.SS7 



HOARD OF Sri'KKVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Required Match: 

Indirect Costs: 
Comments: 



Operating Expenses 

Travel 

Staff Mileage 

Telephone 

Supplies and Forms 

Audit 

Personal Computer (1) 
Modem 
Subtotal 

Indirect Costs 

Total 



$1,676 
1,603 
1,800 
837 
1,167 
1,598 
4,591 

122. 



14,005 

5.836 

$116,728* 



* Includes grant amount of $105,055 plus $11,673 in required 
matching funds. 

$11,673, which is included in the Adult Probation 
Department's 1992-93 budget. 

$5,836 (5.5 percent of total grant) 

1. The proposed grant amount of $105,055 is $64,107 or 156.5 
percent more than the 1992-93 grant amount of $40,948. This 
increased funding primarily reflects the increase in grant 
staff from one to two Senior Probation Officers. 

2. The Adult Probation Department advises that due to 
seniority, one of the Senior Probation Officers would be 
retained through another funding source, if grant funding 
should be terminated. However, the most recently hired 
Senior Probation Officer would be terminated, if grant funds 
are terminated. 

3. The application deadline for this grant is June 3, 1992. 
Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
authorize the Department to apply for the proposed grant 
retroactively. 

4. Reference to indirect costs in the amount of $5,836 is 
included in the body of the legislation but not in the title of the 
legislation. Therefore the proposed legislation should be 
amended to reference indirect costs in the amount of $5,836 in 
the title of the legislation. 

5. Attached is the "Summary of Grant Request", as prepared 
by the Adult Probation Department, for the proposed grant. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



30 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

6. A Disability Access Checklist has been prepared by the 
Department and is included in the file. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed legislation to (1) authorize the 
Department to apply for the proposed grant retroactively and 
(2) reference indirect costs in the amount of $5,836 in the title 
of the proposed legislation, and approve the proposed 
legislation as amended. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Ilex*- No. 



Grafctor 



_____ _ _ - Su mmary of Grant Request Rev 

lifornia Of fTT^roTT^^r- ^^ probation 



-4/10/90 



Ca 

Justice Planning 



Contact Pu-ic Olin Jones 
Address 1130 K Stree 



DIvUio 

Stctlsi 



Sacraraento, ca . ^tsm 



Communi ty Services 
Contact P.rsoa Sergio CalJZO 
Tetepbo.e (415) 553-1919 



Amount Rrqoested J 
Term: Frow "7-1 -92 



105,055.00 



Application Deadline 6-3-9 2 



To 



6-30-93 



NotifU.tioo Eipttttd pass resolution to ap 
accept, and expend tunas. 
Bo«rd e>f S»pcr»Isort: Finance Committee __ 

Full Board 



:scripiion; Request to (a pply for i (accep t and e xpend} a (new) (coqnitt-— on) ( attocaiio n) (_o;gnqu>_ori lo a) 

•— * F*ntinthe*mocnioiS l05,0bb from the period of 7-l-9~2 to 6-30-93 

tr.pr.vi^ intensive super vision _^__ 



\J. Srnnmarr c 

This ara 



nt is entering its 7th yeaj . Presently one probation °f fi c er 



>St of -wh 



intensively supervises a caseload or up cu.J" probationers mo 

are Hispanic gang members. T he officer has a thorougn Knuwledg_-Q_ 



Hispanic gang activities and Q f community resources. We are seeKin g t 
xpand the grant to the use ot au* of another gang otticei. 



TI The°tbT c t i v 1' Ts to lower the recidivism of probationers assigned to 
this grant caseload(s) either through their rehabilitation or tn~T r 
prompt incarceration it Ehey commit probation violations. 

iv... Effo_ of.RrfPctlgn or Ttrmlrt-tfrm of Tb*- Fund.. , _ . M r.r-^K-hion 

The program would end, resulting in the removal from close probati on 

.supervision of 50 felons who are gang memoes. They wo _id be less 
likplyt-n receive services or be returned to court promptly tor vi ola 



V. Financial Information: 



Grant Amout 
Personnel 
Equipment 
•Contract Sro 

M»t. _ Sopp. 
Fsellttfcs/Spac* 
Otber 
Indirect Costa 

VI. Plti rYrcc^trtr 



C_d__A 

Two Yc_ra Afo 

41,500 
57,308 



_L5_ 



2,512 



.4,525 



•y 



Col. B 
Put Yc-tfOri_. 

40,948 
45,624 



2,130 

2,534 
4,309 



Cvl C 
Paapo acd 

105,055 
96,887 

. 5,324. _ 



4,235 

4,446 
-578T5- 



■VIL-- Personnel 

F/r esc 
p/t esc 

Contractual 



1. 



Col. D 


+ 64, 


107 


+ 51 


263 


+ 5 


324 




+ 2 


105 




+ 1 


912 


+ 1 r 527 




.8 







Reg. Match 
11,673 



Appr^td hi 



/ 



Sources) of bob gnat ftjodhif for salaries of CSC employee* working part-time on this fr__U 



N/A 



Will giint funded emplojf<s bt itt.ifu.sd after this grant Urt_l_»te_? If so, How? 

Yes, because of seniority. However, the mo st recently hired probati 
officer in the Department would be laid offT~ ' ' ~ " ~~~~~~_ 

*?II_ — CjJttfxiCliiiLLSxixLtii: Op*n Bid ________ Sol* Source _ (*~»- -—_.._-**—_.»» e__ t _=r=™) 



32 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item Ik - File 130-92-4 
Department: Adult Probation 



Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Grant Period: 



Resolution authorizing the Chief Adult Probation Officer of 
the City and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and 
expend a continuation Federal grant in the amount of 
$188,400 made available through the Office of Criminal 
Justice Planning. 

$188,400 

Federal funds through California Office of Criminal Justice 
Planning (OCJP) 

July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 



Project Title: 

Project 
Description 



Grant Budget: 



San Francisco Adult Probation's Drug Abatement Program 



The San Francisco Adult Probation's Drug Abatement 
Project targets street-level drug offenders and provides 
assistance for drug offenders through field surveillance, 
frequent drug testing and close supervision of probationers' 
participation in treatment. This program will continue to 
provide frequent drug testing of probationers and close 
supervision of probationers' progress in treatment. Field 
surveillance will be used as necessary to insure frequent 
contacts with probationers, and verification of residence, 
employment and general compliance with conditions of 
probation. The two Senior Probation Officers assigned to this 
program would each supervise caseloads not to exceed 35 
probationers. 

Part of the project will consist of working with female 
probationers who are pregnant drug users, particularly 
users of crack cocaine, and drug-using mothers of small 
children. The goal will be not only the rehabilitation of the 
probationers but the protection of their children. The project 
will also concentrate on offenders aged 18 to 21 who are 
involved in drug sales and gang activity. 

Personnel 

8442 Senior Probation Officer (2.0 FTE) $102,051 

1426 Senior Clerk Typist (1.0 FTE) 32,181 

Fringe Benefits 12.660 

$146,892 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

33 



Memo to Finance 


Committee 






July 8, 1992 


Operating Expenses 








Travel 


$2,904 






Office Supplies 


900 






Telephone 


600 






Drug Testing Supplies & Analysis 


24,850 






Equipment 


1,000 






Audit 


1,884 






Subtotal 




32,138 




Indirect Costs 




9.370 




Total 




$188,400 


Required Match: 


None 







Comments: 1. The proposed grant amount of $188,400 is $17,605 or 10.3 

percent more than the 1991-92 grant amount of $170,795. 

2. The Adult Probation Department advises that, contingent 
upon the identification of another source of funds, if grant 
funds are terminated or reduced, grant personnel will be 
terminated or reduced accordingly. 

3. The proposed continuation grant is one of four Drug 
Abatement Projects included in this Report to the Finance 
Committee of July 8, 1992, as follows: 



File 
Number 



Grant 
Amount 



Adult Probation* 
District Attorney 
Police Department 
Sheriff 



Subject of the proposed resolution. 



130-924 


$188,400 


138-924 


330,812 


143-92-3 


137,962 


152-92-2 


84.558 



$741,732 



4. It is possible that if additional funds are made available by 
the State Office of Criminal Justice Planning, this grant 
could be augmented at a later date. According to the Mayor's 
Office, such additional funds would be used to extend the 
grant period. Because the State may need to appropriate these 
funds quickly, a delay may result in a loss to the City of those 
additional funds. Therefore, the proposed resolution contains 
in the body of the legislation, the phrase "including any 
extensions or amendments thereof so that the grant may be 
extended in a timely fashion. If approved, the Adult. 

BOARD OF SI IPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



34 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Probation Department would not have to request approval of 
the Board of Supervisors to apply for, accept and expend any 
future augmentation to this grant. As such, the Budget 
Analyst believes that approval of the proposed legislation is a 
policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 

5. The application deadline for this grant is June 9, 1992. 
Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
authorize the Department to apply for the proposed grant 
retroactively. 

6. Reference to indirect costs in the amount of $9,370 is 
included in the body of the legislation but not in the title of the 
legislation. Therefore the proposed legislation should be 
amended to reference indirect costs in the amount of $9,370 in 
the title of the legislation. 

7. Attached is the "Summary of Grant Request", as prepared 
by the Adult Probation Department, for the proposed grant. 

8. A Disability Access Checklist has been prepared by the 
Department and is included in the file. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution, which includes 
authorization of any extensions or amendments without 
subsequent approval by the Board of Supervisors, is a policy 
matter for the Board of Supervisors. Should the Board of 
Supervisors approve the proposed legislation, it should be 
amended (1) to authorize the Department to apply for the 
proposed grant retroactively and (2) to reference indirect costs 
in the amount of $9,370 in the title of the proposed legislation. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

35 



AUtacnment 



IUre.- No. 



AL , PROBATION 



Summary of G 1_R£Huj:s1 



Critlor 
Contact Person 



Office of Criminal Justice Plan ning 
John Isaacson 



Adult Probation 



Community Services 



Address 1130 K Street, Suite 300 
Sacramento, CA 95814 



Amount Requested $ 

Term: From 07/01/92 



188,400 



Division 

Section 

Contact Person Carmen Bushe 

Telephone (415) 553-1901 



06/30/93 



Board of Supervisors: 



_ ... June 9, 1992 

Application Deadline 

Notification Expected PdSS resolution to a| 1 
FlnfrVe' d^MeT^I^^ - ^^ 



Full Board 



I. Tttm Description: Request to (apply for ) ( accept and expend) a ( new) (continuation) (allocation ) (augmentation to a) 
coa^^-— >.) grant in the amount of S 188,400 from the period of 07/01/92 to 06/30/93 

toprovide drug offender intensive supervision services. 

II. Summary: (o»=vu~r.—4-4i~<: ~*> . p^p. «^< -»><-. -jf-^--> The serious drug problem places a heavy 
demand on the resources of medical, social services and law enforcement agencies. The numb er 
of cri minal street gangs involved in drug sales and women with children and pregnant women , - 
who ar e drug abusers, is increasing at a rapid rate, hor Adult Probation, this means Dotn a 
rising workload and a large increase in the proportion ot the total workload wnicn involves du 
This program will provide intensive supervision tor selected high risk drug otte nder s, w-itn a 
focus on women who are pregnant W have Children, and yoimy male — ddull ufTuiiilers. 

HI. Outcomes/Oblectlves: 

'The program will provide frequent drug testing of probationers and close supervision o 
probationers' progress in treatment. The two caseloads will not exceed Jb active case 

"each. Field surveillance will be used as necessary to insure frequent contacts with 
probationers, and for verification of residence,, employment and general compliance. 

fV. Effects of Reduction or Termination of These Funds: 

The reduction or termination of these funds will overwhelm the Community Services 
units due to the number of probationers either selling or using drugs. 



V. Financial Information: 
6 mos 
Col. A Col. B 

Two Yean Ajo P«t Ye«/Orij. 

Grant Amount 101,376 170,795 

Personnel 77,718 155,801 

Equipment -0- 

•Contract Svc. -0- 

Mat. & Supp. 15,943 

Facilities/Space ■ 

Other - 2,646 ■ 

Indirect Costs .5,069 

XL DaH Praising 

Vn. Personnel 

F/T CSC 3 

P/T CSC 

Contractual - 



-0- 
-0- 
1,500 

4,954 
8,540 



Col, c 

Propoied 

188,400 

146,892 

1,000 

-0- 


Col. D 

Qunjc 

+17,605 

- 8,909 

+ 1,000 

-0- 


26,350 


+24,850 


4,788 
9,370 • 


166 
830 


3 


NONE 









Reg. Match Approved bv 



Source(s) of non - £ ra D t funding for salaries of CSC employees vrorklDp part time on this prant: 
N/A 



Will £r »nt funded employees be retained »fter this £ ra D t terminates? If so, Hoi 

Contingent on availability of funds 



Qnluclual^fkrYkfj; Open Bid 



Sole Source 



36 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 11 - File 138-92-2 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 
Project: 
Description 



Department: District Attorney 

Item: Resolution authorizing the District Attorney to apply for 

funds in the amount of $112,970 through the Office of the 
Attorney General for the operation of a project entitled "Child 
Victim Witness Investigative Pilot Project" for the period July 
1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. 

$112,970 

July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Office of the Attorney General 

Child Victim Witness Investigative Pilot Project 

The City's Child Victim Witness Investigative Pilot Project is 
one of three demonstration pilot projects chosen by the 
Attorney General's Office to develop, deliver and evaluate a 
comprehensive, multi-disciplinary approach to the 
investigation of child sexual abuse. The goals of the project 
are to reduce trauma to child victims of sexual abuse, 
improve the truth-finding process by reducing the number of 
interviews and interviewers, developing trained experts in 
interviewing child victims, and videotaping interviews of 
child sexual abuse victims. The project will be in its third 
and final year in fiscal year 1992-93. 

Project Budget Personnel 

Project Coordinator 
Administrative Asst. 
Forensic Advisor 
Grants Manager 
Accountant 
Fringe Benefits 

Total Personnel 

Travel/Training 

Out-of-County Travel: 
Mileage & Tolls 
Per Diem 
Parking 

Total Travel 



FTEs 


Salaries 


1.00 


$50,284 


1.00 


26,598 


0.07 


7,180 


0.05 


3,102 


0.05 


1,926 




13.938 



2.17 



$103,028 



$175 
28 
16 



$219 



KOAKDOKSUI'KKVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Operating Expenses 



Photocopies 


$674 


Office Supplies 


602 


Postage 


208 


Machine Rental 


197 


Telephone 


1,263 


Audit (1% of Total Grant) 


1.130 


Total Operating Expenses 


$4,074 


Indirect Costs 


5,649 



Total 



$112,970 



Required Match: None 



Indirect Costs: 
Comments: 



$5,649 or 5 percent of the total grant. 



1. The proposed resolution authorizes the District Attorney to 
apply for $112,970 for the Child Victim Witness Investigative 
Pilot Project. Ms. Donna Medley of the District Attorney's 
Office advises that the proposed resolution should 
retroactively authorize the District Attorney's Office to apply 
for a grant of $112,970 since the application deadline was May 
15, 1992 and the District Attorney has already applied for the 
grant. Ms. Medley reports that at the time of this writing, the 
District Attorney's Office has not been advised by the State as 
to the exact amount of the grant to be awarded for this 
Project, but that the original deadline for notification of the 
grant amount was June 30, 1992. 

2. Attached is a copy of the Summary of Grant Request form, 
as completed by the District Attorney's Office. In Part I of the 
form (Item Description), the grant amount should be $112,970 
rather than $113,000. 

3. The District Attorney's Office has completed a Disability 
Access Checklist, which is in the file. The District Attorney's 
Office has indicated on the checklist in Item 11 that the 
project staff is in need of disability awareness training. Also 
included in the file is a copy of a letter to Mr. Larry del Carlo 
of the Mayor's Office from Ms. Medley, dated September 16, 
1991, requesting disability awareness training for the project 
staff. 

4. The out-of-county travel amount is calculated based on 
four trips to Sacramento (round trip) by project staff. The 
$175 for mileage and tolls is calculated by assuming 190 miles 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

38 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

for each of the four trips at the mileage rate of $.22 per mile 
(or $167.20) and $8 for tolls. Per diem is calculated at $7 for 
each of the four trips (or $28). 

5. The proposed grant of $112,970 is 15.7 percent less than the 
total grant amount of $134,000 awarded in fiscal year 1991-92 
(an initial grant of $112,970 and an augmentation to the grant 
of $21,030). 

6. The proposed grant of $112,970 includes indirect costs of 
$5,649, and these indirect costs are noted in the body, but not 
in the title, of the proposed resolution. Therefore, the 
proposed resolution should be amended to include indirect 
costs of $5,649, or five percent of the total grant, in the title of 
the proposed resolution. 

7. Ms. Medley advises that the District Attorney's Office has 
been exploring alternative funding sources for the project, 
since fiscal year 1992-93 will be the third and final year in 
which funding will be provided for the project by the State 
Attorney General's Office. Ms. Medley reports that the 
District Attorney's Office has been convening the 
Coordination of Child Abuse Response Systems Task Force, 
which also consists of representatives from the Juvenile 
Division of the Police Department, the Department of Public 
Health, and the Mayor's Office. One of the Task Force's 
objectives is to explore alternative funding sources. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to retroactively authorize the 
District Attorney's Office to apply for $112,970, and to include 
indirect costs of $5,649 in the title of the proposed resolution. 
Approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 









BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

39 



Ifl 

1 £* 



Attorney neral's Office 



District Attorney's! 



Contact Person Rpth Gould 

Address 1515 "K" Street, Suite 100 



Victim Witness Bureau 



Sacramento, CA 95814 



Amount Requested S __i_L.-l-<_ 

Term: From 7/1/92 To 6/30/93 
Health Commission 



Division 

Section 

Contact Person TVinna Med 1 PV 

Telephone 5S3-9046 



Application Deadline S/'5'/92 



Notification Expected ' f7/?n/Q7 

Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Board 

I. Item Description: Request to (apply for) (accept and expend) a (new) (continuation) (allocation) (augmentai 
(a^. «^»~« -«.> grani in the amount of S 111,000 from the period of 7/1/92 [0 6/30 /9! 
to provide rp-ilrl vir-t--im wi tnpss Investigative 



LL 



S.j 



(Co 



ivWory; m-J (^d^czsad: 






San Fr^nri^rn is one O 



f three demonstration pilot projects chosen by the Attorr 



Gener? 



,,«. nffir-P to develop, deliver, and evaluate a comprehensive, muiLiaiscir 



^^ h tn ; hp investigation of child sexual abuse. The goals are to reduce! 



^ V hQ chUZ, inprnve the truth-finding process, and protect tine rignts oi 



all ir 



ITT, Qutcomes/Qhiectives: 

1)Pgr w r.he n, ro hPr of interviews /interviewers for the child; 2) develop trainee 



in in1-e>r-vio'.ving 



children; 3) conduct multidisciplmary team case piaiuu' 



and monitoring; 



d) videotape interviews of child sexual abuse victims ,- anu d> t 



T £icipate in .research and evaluation of Project activit 

IZZ rrf>r<rX a K>oucnon or T'^rnination of Tri^c Fund*:: 
Reductio n or termination of the funds would not permit San Francisco to^proyffi 
Child "interview Specialists to conauct ccmprene nslve xiiLtti-vj-ewa, video tapc^chilcl 
w itnesses, or coordinate a multidisciplmary review uf 
juvenile and/or criminal court . 

V. Financial Information: 



child abuse ca3C3 m & 



Grant Amount 
Personnel 
Equipment 
'Contract Svc. 
Mat. & Supp. 
Facilities/Space 
Other 
Indirect Costs 



Col. A 
Two Yean Ago 

141,460 
63,763""" 
13,961 

18,720 

265 
13,300 
24,378 



7,073 



XJL_Dat2 PrQcr5sin' 



NA 




Col. B 

?xi\ Ycar/Orig. 

134,000 
98,828 
1,810 
1,870 
2,897 
3,106 
18,789 
6,700 



NA 



Col. C 

Proposed 

112,970 

T03,028 





602 

3,691 
5,649 



NA 



Col. D 

Change 

(21,030) 

+4,200 
( 1,810) 
( 1,870) 
( 2,295) 
( 3,106) 
(15,098) 
( 1,051) 



Reo. Match Ado 













Source(s) of non-grant funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this grant: 
OCJF, General Fund, State Board of Control 



Will grant funded employees be retained after this grant terminates? If so, How? 
Employees will b e retained if other grant funds are available and applicable 
to their job cla ssification . 

^HL — CjmjXiiluol__5j: 



H Open Bid 



J1A_ 



40 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lm - File 138-92-3 



Department: 
Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 
Project: 
Description: 



Project Budget 



District Attorney 

Resolution authorizing the District Attorney to apply for, 
accept and expend grant funds of $236,141 through the 
California Office of Criminal Justice Planning for the 
operation of the Career Criminal Program for the period July 
1, 1992 through June 30, 1993, and agreeing to provide a cash 
match of $23,614. 

$236,141 

July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

California Office of Criminal Justice Planning (OCJP) 

Career Criminal Program 

This would be the fourteenth year of funding for this State 
mandated program (Chapter 2.3 of the California Penal 
Code, commencing Section 999B). The Career Criminal 
Program provides specialized, intensive prosecution focused 
on repeat offenders involved in robberies and residential 
burglaries, and ultimately seeks the prosecution and 
maximum period of incarceration of the "career criminal.'* 

The primary objectives of the program include identifying 
recidivist offenders, expeditiously and effectively prosecuting 
these offenders, and incarcerating these offenders for the 
maximum term authorized by the law. Other objectives 
include eliminating or reducing the use of plea bargaining, 
reducing the caseload for career criminal prosecutors and 
investigators, and using vertical prosecution (i.e., the use of 
one prosecutor per case from the initial filing or appearance 
to sentencing) with career criminal cases. 



Personnel 

Head Attorneys 
Principal Attorneys 
Investigators 
Investigative Assistants 
Legal Stenographer 
Subtotal Salaries 

Mandatory Fringe Rencfits 

Subtotal Personnel Costs 



FTEs 



Salaries 



0.70 


$68,288 




1.05 


71,136 




0.70 


35,845 




0.35 


12,195 




0.30 


12.034 




3.10 




$199,498 
39.353 



Ji^s.SM 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

41 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Operating Expenses 



Required Match: 



Indirect Costs: 



Comments: 



Travel (one grant-related two day 






conference in Southern California 






for two persons) 


$1,282 




Audit 


2,598 




Office Supplies 


765 




Postage 


264 




Photocopy Rental/Supplies 


1,137 




Telephones 


1,607 




Legal Publications 


882 




Subtotal Operating Expenses 




$8,535 


Indirect Costs 




12.369 



Total Program Budget 
Less required match 
Total Proposed Grant 



$259,755 

23.614 

$236,141 



The required match of $23,614 is included in the District 
Attorney's budget for fiscal year 1992-93, to be funded through 
the General Fund. The State OCJP requires that ten percent 
of the proposed grant of $236,141 be matched by local funds. 

$12,369 or 5 percent of $247,386 ($238,851 for personnel costs 
and $8,535 for operating expenses) is included in the grant 
amount. 

1. Since the deadline for submission of the proposal was 
April 30, 1992 and since the District Attorney has already 
applied for the grant, the proposed resolution should be 
amended to retroactively authorize the District Attorney's 
Office to apply for the proposed grant. 

2. Attached is a copy of the Summary of Grant Request form, 
as completed by the District Attorney's Office. As reflected on 
the attachment, the proposed grant amount of $259,755 is the 
total program budget (the requested grant amount of 
$236,141, plus the required local match of $23,614). 

3. The District Attorney's Office has completed a Disability 
Access Checklist, which is in the file. The District Attorney's 
Office has indicated on the checklist in Item 11 that the 
project staff is in need of disability awareness training. Also 
included in the file is a copy of a letter to Mr. Larry del Carlo 
of the Mayor's Office from Ms. Donna Medley of the District 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Attorney's Office, dated September 16, 1991, requesting 
disability awareness training for the District Attorney's staff. 

4. The proposed grant award of $236,141 represents the same 
grant amount that was provided to the District Attorney's 
Office for the Career Criminal Program in fiscal year 1991- 
92. At the time of this writing, the State has not yet notified 
the District Attorney's Office of the exact grant amount to be 
provided for the Career Criminal Program. 

5. Indirect costs are noted in the body, but not in the title, of 
the proposed resolution. Therefore, the proposed resolution 
should be amended to reflect indirect costs of $12,369 in the 
title of the proposed resolution. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to retroactively authorize the 
District Attorney's Office to apply for a grant of $236,141, and 
to reflect indirect costs of $12,369 in the title of the proposed 
resolution. Approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 



BQARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

43 



It* 



S[ |nini;ir> <>f 



Grartor Office of Criminal Justice Plann ing dumoh District Attorney's Of fice 

Contact rersoo Ralph Rowe Section 

Addrcss 1130 K. Street, Suite 300 Contact Person Brideet Bane 

Sacramento. CA 95814 Telephone 553-1895 ____^ 



Amount Requested S 259.755 . Application Deadline April 30. 1992 

Term: From 07-01-92 To 06-3Q-93 Notification Expected 



Health Commission . Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Doard 

I. Item Description: Request loffapply for) (accept and expend) a (new ^conunuauonH aUocauon) (augmentation to a) 
to* ^ot~. — ». g T _ nl _, the amount o( S'lh!±J25ZL from the period of 07-01-92 10 06-30-93 

to pmvirif. Career Criminal Prosecution Program services. 



The Career Criminal Program, a State mandated project, will begin its 14th year of f u| 
The underlying essence of the Career Criminal Program has not changed as the program 
designed to be crime specific concentrating on the prosecution of cases involving ro b 
and residential burglary. The funding amount from the Office of Criminal Justice Pl a 
ning for the FY 92-93 will remain the same as FY91-92. 

HI. Outcomes/Objectives; 

The recidivist offender who persist in the commission of thesebffenses has a signifi c 
negative effect on the quality of life of law abiding San Francisco citizens. There f 
the most important objective for the Career Criminal Program is the prosecution and m 
iurn period of incarceration of the "Career Criminal". See attachment for additional 
TV. Fffects of Reduction or Terminat ion of These Funds; objectives 

The Career Criminal Program has proven to be effective as well as valuable to the cit 
of the City and County of San Francisco, continued funding is being sought in order fr 
maintain this project. The community will De negatively impacted should this nype of 
prosecution be reduced or terminated. 

v. Financial Information: 

Col. A Col. B Col. C Col. D Req. Match Approved b 

Two Years Ago P»st Ycar/Orig. Proposed Qiuigc 

crant Amount 270,578 259,755 259,755 -0- 23,614 

Personnel 248,777 238,397 238,851 +454 



n/a n/a n/a n/< 



n/a n/a ~ n/a ~ n/a 
529 826 765 "^oT 



Equipment n/a n/a n/a n/a 

•Contract Svc. 
Mat. & Supp. 
Facilities/Space 
Other 
Indirect Costs 



n/a n/a n/a n/a 



7.743 8,163 7,770 ^59T 

13,529 12 360 12.369 ""^CF" 



YL Data Processing 

(«— i=dwk»*^-^) n/a n/a n/a n/a 

VII. Personnel 

Frr csc 10* 10* 10* n/a 

P/T CSC 

Contractual 



positions at varying percentages - balance paid by District Attorney's General Fund. 

Source(s) of Don-grant funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this grant: 



see VII above 



Will grant funded employees be retained after this grant terminates? If so, Hov»? 

Grant funded employees will be retained contingent upon continued source of funding. 



' V HI . — Contr a c t u a l Se rvi ce s ; Open Bid Sole Source (j-..— ..^r-,-. <„f~»p~».f., 

44 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item In - File 138-92-4 



Department: 
Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 
Project: 
Description - 



District Attorney 

Resolution authorizing the District Attorney to apply for, 
accept and expend a continuation State grant of $330,812 for 
the "San Francisco District Attorney's Drug Abatement 
Project" for the period July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. 

$330,812 

July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

California Office of Criminal Justice Planning (OCJP) 

San Francisco District Attorney's Drug Abatement Project 

The District Attorney's Drug Abatement Project provides 
staff to focus on a more aggressive prosecution of an 
increasing number of drug-related cases. The assignment of 
2.47 FTE attorneys and 0.10 FTE investigators allows for the 
singling out of significant narcotics sources and offenders for 
intensive investigation and prosecution. 

The staff in the District Attorney's Office assigned to this 
Project will handle all levels of drug dealers, ranging from 
street level to major vendors, and will target probationers 
who are continuing to involve themselves in drug trade. The 
Project will seek to dispose of cases at the earliest possible 
stage and to obtain the most appropriate sentence for 
offenders. 



Project Budget Personnel 



FTEs 



Salaries 



8182 Head Attorney 
8180 Principal Attorney 
8180 Principal Attorneys 
8146 Investigator 
8132 Assistant Investigator 
Subtotal Salaries 

Fringe Benefits (25%) 
Travel (OCJP Requirement) 
Indirect Costs 
Audit Costs 

Total Project Costs 



0.07 


$ 7,388 




0.40 


39,646 




2.00 


196,272 




0.05 


2,551 




0.05 


1.856 




2.57 




$247,713 

62,150 
1,100 

16,541 
3.308 



0,812 



Required Match: 



None 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Indirect Costs: $16,541 or 5 percent of grant amount of $330,812 

Comments: 1. Mr. Robert Ring of the District Attorney's Office reports 

that if the State grant of $330,812 is reduced or terminated, 
the result would be a reduction of staff. 

2. The District Attorney's Office has completed a Disability 
Access Checklist, which is in the file. The District Attorney's 
Office has indicated on the checklist in Item 11 that the 
project staff is in need of disability awareness training. 

3. The proposed continuation grant is one of four Drug 
Abatement Projects included in this Report to the Finance 
Committee, as follows: 



Item 

Adult Probation 
District Attorney 
Police 
Sheriff 

Total 



File Number 

130-92-4 
138-92-4 
143-92-2 
152-92-2 



Grant Amount 

$188,400 
330,812 
137,962 

84.558 

$741,732 



* The subject of the proposed resolution. 

4. It is possible that if additional funds are made available by 
the State Office of Criminal Justice Planning, this grant 
could be augmented at a later date. According to the Mayor's 
Office, such additional funds would be used to extend the 
grant period. Because the State may need to appropriate 
these funds quickly, a delay may result in loss to the City of 
those additional funds. Therefore, the proposed resolution 
contains the phrase "including any extensions or 
amendments thereof so that the grant may be extended in a 
timely fashion. If approved, the District Attorney would not 
have to request approval of the Board of Supervisors to apply 
for, acccept and expend any future augmentations to this 
grant. The Budget Analyst believes that approval of the 
proposed resolution, regarding the phrase "including any 
extensions or amendments thereof," is a policy matter for the 
Board of Supervisors. 

5. The application deadline for this grant was June 9, 1992. 
Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively authorize the District Attorney's Office to apply 
for the proposed grant, since the District Attorney's Office 
has already applied for this grant. Mr. Ring advises that at 
the time of this writing, the District Attorney's Office has not 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



46 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

been notified as to the exact amount of the proposed State 
grant. 

6. Attached is a copy of the Summary of Grant Request form, 
as completed by the District Attorney's Office. 

7. The $330,812 includes indirect costs of $16,541 in the grant 
budget. Since the indirect costs were not mentioned in the 
title of the proposed resolution and the specific amount of 
indirect costs was not noted in the body of the proposed 
resolution, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
include indirect costs of $16,541 in both the title and the body 
of the proposed resolution. 

Recommendation: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to retroactively authorize 
the District Attorney's Office to apply for the proposed grant 
and to include indirect costs of $16,541 in both the title and the 
body of the proposed legislation. 

2. In accordance with Comment No. 4 above, we consider 
approval of the proposed resolution to be a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 



BOAR!) OF SUPKR VISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

hi 



ittan No. 



District Attorney Summary of Grant ftenucst 



Rev. <n.Q/9Q 



Grantor 
Contact Parson 



O FFICE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNI NG 
John Isaacson 



DlTitloB 

Section 



District Attorney 



Narcotics Unit 



Address inn K Street 



Sacramento, California 



Contact Person 
Telephone 



Robert Ring 



553-14^ 



Ajaoont Requested 

Term: From 

Health ConunUsion 



T. Item Description; 



330,812 



7/1/9 2 to 6/30/93 



Application Deadline June 
NotlTlcatloa Erpected 



1992 



Board of Super-* l»tr: Flaanca Committee 
Foil Board 



Reqnest to (apply for) (accent and expend) a (oew) (ronMiirurion) (aJloa^oa) (augmcnarion to a) 
gam in ti» amount ofS 330, 812 from me period of 7/1/92 » , 6/30/93 
frtpmvlA- San Francisco Drue Abatement Program serpen 



n. Sanmicc K 

The District Attorney's Drug Abatement Program will provide 3 experienced prosecu tors 
to handle all levels of drug dealers from street level -to major vendor. Additionall y*. 
the program will target probationers who continue involvment in the drug trade. 



Ill OntcoTnes/ObtecrtTe*! 

The program will be used to dispose of cas e s at the earl iest possible stage and 
obtain the most appropriate sentence f or each offender. ' 



TV. EfTp<t« of Redaction or Termination of Tn««a gJBgfj& 

A reduction or termination of theqp fnn^ would devas tate the Narcotics prosecution 
unit and would adversely offset the ability to handle th es e target offenders. 



V. Financial Information; 

6 Mo . Grant 

T»© YeanAjo 

Grant Amonnt 178, 189 

Personnel 166,398 

Equipment v 

•Contract Stc 

Mat. & Sopp. 

Facilities/Space % 

Other 2,882 

Indirect Coats 8,909 

VT. Pet. Progeny 



?/T CSC 

P/T CSC 

Contractual 



N/A 



Col. B 

Put YuDvii^. 

300.206 



■4il02 



4*_ 
-JL/A. 



330. 812. 
309,863 



4,m 



. Ni.A_ 



Col. D 

+30,606 
+28.769 



_3J2£_ 



16.541 ' + i.-ni 



None 



Rea. Match Approved jg 



Soorc*(j) of non-frajit fnndinf f-T salaries of CSC eiaplo/eea working part-time on till jraat: 
Positions at vary ing percentages - balance paid by the District Attornpv 
General Fund. " 



Wtu grant txmAed. «xaploj»*» b* retained aftar tfeh y:nrit terminates? It »o, How? 

Grant funded empl oyees will be retained con tingent upon contin ued source offm 
available. " 



•^TTT. Onn-actnn <:^ nT o^-en Bid 



N/A 



_ Sole Source 



N/A 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lo - File 143-92-2 



Department: 
Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Grant Period: 
Project Title: 
Description: 



Grant Budget 



Police Department 

Resolution authorizing the Chief of Police of the City and 
County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and expend 
continuation Federal grant funds in the amount of $137,962 
made available through the Office of Criminal Justice 
Planning. 

$137,962 

Federal funds through the California Office of Criminal 
Justice Planning (OCJP). 

July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

San Francisco Police Department's Drug Abatement Project 

The proposed grant will be used by the Police Department 
primarily to (1) target street drug dealers and (2) coordinate 
efforts with the District Attorney and the Adult Probation 
Department to target certain probationers suspected of being 
involved in narcotics operations. The Police Department's 
goal with respect to street drug dealers would be to disrupt 
the dealers daily operations by conducting high visibility 
"Buy/Bust Operations" (the purchase of drugs followed by the 
immediate arrest of the drug dealer) and "Buy Programs" 
(drug purchases) which permit the Department to serve 
arrest and/or search warrants in high numbers. The areas 
to be targeted would include the Tenderloin, the Potrero 
District, the Western Addition, the Ocean View District, the 
Mission District and the City's parks. 

Personnel 

8260 Criminalist (1.0 FTE) $44,530 

Q50 Sergeant (.25 FTE) 13,387 

Fringe Benefits 2,600 

Subtotal $60,517 

Overtime 

1,708 hours® $35 per hour 59,780 

Operating Expenses 

Travel $1,550 
Audit 1,500 

Equipment .'1957 

Confidential Informant Funds 3.760 

Subtotal 10,767 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

49 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Required Match: 
Indirect Costs: 

Comments: 



Indirect Costs $ 6.898 

Total $137,962 

None 
$6,898 (5% of total grant) 

1. The proposed grant amount of $137,962 is $12,531 or 10 
percent more than the 1991-92 grant amount of $125,431. 

2. The Police Department advises that if grant funds are 
terminated or reduced, grant personnel will be terminated or 
reduced accordingly. 

3. The proposed continuation grant is one of four Drug 
Abatement Projects included in this Report to the Finance 
Committee of July 8, 1992, as follows: 



Adult Probation 
District Attorney 
Police Department* 
Sheriff 
Total 



File 

Number 

130-92-4 
138-92-4 
143-92-3 
152-92-2 



Grant 

Amount 

$188,400 

330,812 

137,962 

84.558 

$741,732 



*Subject of the proposed resolution. 

4. Sergeant John Hallisy of the Police Department reports 
that the $59,780 in overtime costs is required to implement 
this project because the Police personnel needed to perform 
the "Buy/Bust" operations and "Buy Programs" do not have 
sufficient time to perform these activities in conjunction with 
their regular shift assignments. The $59,780 would pay for 4 
hours of overtime each for seven Police Officers (three 
undercover and four uniform) for 61 days. 

5. It is possible that if additional funds are made available by 
the State Office of Criminal Justice Planning, this grant 
could be augmented at a later date. According to the Mayor's 
Office, such additional funds would be used to extend the 
grant period. Because the State may need to appropriate these 
funds quickly, a delay may result in loss to the City of those 
additional fines. Therefore, the proposed resolution contains 
in the body of the legislation, the phrase "including any 
extensions or amendments thereof so that the grant may be 
extended in a timely fashion. If approved, the Police 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



50 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Department would not have to request approval of the Board 
of Supervisors to apply for, accept and expend any future 
augmentation to this grant. As such, the Budget Analyst 
believes that approval of the proposed legislation is a policy 
matter for the Board of Supervisors. 

6. The application deadline for this grant is June 9, 1992. 
Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
authorize the Department to apply for the proposed grant 
retroactively. 

7. Reference to indirect costs in the amount of $6,898 is 
included in the body of the legislation but not in the title of the 
legislation. Therefore, the proposed legislation should be 
amended to reference indirect costs in the amount of $6,898 in 
the title of the legislation. 

8. Attached is the "Summary of Grant Request", as prepared 
by the Police Department, for the proposed grant. 

9. A Disability Access Checklist has been prepared by the 
Department and is included in the file. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution, which includes 
authorization of any extensions or amendments without 
subsequent approval by the Board of Supervisors, is a policy 
matter for the Board of Supervisors. Should the Board of 
Supervisors approve the proposed legislation, it should be 
amended (1) to authorize the Department to apply for the 
proposed grant retroactively and (2) to reference indirect costs 
in the amount of $6,898 in the title of the proposed legislation. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

51 



Iter*." No. 



- Summary Qf __r' ' Request Rev. i/10/90 



OFFICE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNING -,„..,„ '' SaN FRANCISCO POLICE DZ»T 



? rar " t0r "jOHN ISSACSON 7~~~* Section NARC0TIC ^ bURE M " 

Contact Person » SGT JOHN HALL1SV 

^ . 113 ° K ST ' SUIiE iU -- Contact P>rso__ 

Addr " S ^^URanFTmT7- tA 95tU4 Telephone ^^ /V/U 



. „. ...j ^137, 962 Application Deadline 

Amount Requested 5 6M0/9J ~ 

Tcrin . From U112L— To b/ ' Notification Expected 



JUNE 9, 1992 



Board of Supervisors? Finance Committee 
Full Board 



I. Ttem Description; Request to (apply for) (accey and expend) a (new) (continuation) (ajlocauon) (augn^en^or. to a) 

co>_ w ^»«to« grant - m ^ e amount of S ■*■■*/ ,962 jj om ^ period of , to ______ 

^provide SPECIAL ENFORCEMENT OPERATIONS ^^ 

TARgVI^^DEA T^TR^^^ AND BE INVOLVED IN A "»OSSE P LAN' 

WTTH THE DA AND THE PROBATION DEPT. TO TARGET fRUbATlONEKb ._ - - - 



IMP ACT WILL STARREST' STREET DEALERS AND ASSIST EACH NEIGHBORHOOD IN TRYING TO DISRUP T 
THE NARCOTICS ACTIVITY IN THEIR AREA. 

TV. Effects of Redaction or Terminat i on of These F und s ; ^ mi ™ —,„ ,«,,,« at-t ma 
TER MINATION OR REDUCTION OF THESE FUNDS WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT THE OPERATION 

OF THIS PROJECT ■ 

V. Financial Information: 



Col. A CoT. B Col. C Col. D Rec. Match Approved bv 

Two Years Ago Pait Year/Or._, Proposed Change 

$74,450 $125,431 $137962 +$12,531 N/A 

$69,585 $113,2-99 $ liy, 69 7 .50 +$4,398.50 ■ 



Grant Amount 
Personnel 

Equipment $3,700 " +$3,700 

■Contract Svc. ___ ° ° U 



Mat. & Supp. 

Facilities/Space 0- ° 

Other AUDIT $742 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 

Indirect Costs $ 3,460 $ 6,272 $ 6,898 ■ +$ 626 

TRAVEL $ 633 $ 1,360 $ 1,550 +$ 190 
VI. Data Processing 

.««, •««}_.)*— o N/A , 

VTT. Personnel 

F/T CSC 3 2 1 _____ 

P/T CSC "' -I 
Contrictual 



Source(s) of non-grant funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this c-rant: 



SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPT 



Will grant funded employees be retained after this grant terminates? If so How'' 

CONTINGENT ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDING 



* V HT. — Contrnrtnal Services; Open Bid Sole Source (j^K.^.^iiiw^hiL^^F^) 

52 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lp - File 146-92-41 



Department: 
Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description: 



Budget: 



AIDS Office 

Department of Public Health 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health, 
AIDS Office, to apply for a continuation grant of $1,794,405, 
which includes indirect costs in the amount of $207,155, 
based on 20 percent of personnel costs, from the Department 
of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control, 
to continue funding the Epidemiological Study of the Natural 
History of HIV/AIDS in Homosexual/Bisexual Men 
Previously Enrolled in Studies of Hepatitis B Infection for the 
residents of San Francisco. 

$1,794,405 

November 1, 1992 to October 31, 1993 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) 

Epidemiological Study of the Natural History of HrWAIDS in 
Homosexual/Bisexual Men Previously Enrolled in Studies of 
Hepatitis B Infection. 

The proposed continuation grant would fund further 
epidemiological investigations into the natural history of the 
HIV virus and AIDS infection, based on a group of 
homosexual and bisexual men who were enrolled between 
1978 and 1980 in studies of the incidence and prevention of 
Hepatitis B. Because blood samples from these 6,705 
individuals were extracted between 1978 and 1980, near the 
onset of the HD7 epidemic, the study group has provided a 
unique opportunity to investigate the natural history of HP/ 
infection, including rates of infection and transmission, 
behavioral and biological risk factors, the progress of disease, 
the relationship of HP7 to other infectious agents, and related 
research subjects. According to the Department of Public 
Health, the investigations which would be funded by the 
grant would significantly add to knowledge concerning HIV 
infection and AIDS, and would suggest possible new avenues 
for research, prevention, and treatment. 

The Department of Public Health reports that the proposed 
budget is in development, and will be submitted in connection 
with a request for authorization to accept and expend the 

proposed grant funds. 



Required Match: None 



BQARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

53 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



No. of Persons 
Served: 

Indirect Costs: 

Comments: 



Persons with HIV and others affected by the epidemic. 
$207,155, based on 20 percent of estimated personnel costs. 

1. The AIDS Office has also recently received CDC approval 
of supplemental funds in the amount of $420,851 to finance a 
new activity, the HIV Incidence in Homosexual and Bisexual 
Males Research Project, which will augment the existing 
research activities of the project described above. A request to 
accept and expend the supplemental funding of $420,851 for 
the current year has also been submitted (see Item lr - File 
No. 146-92-44 of this report to the Finance Committee). 

2. The Summary of Grant Request submitted by the 
Department of Public Health is attached. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

54 



.^u- i_ii^LLLL' — v - '- """' - .t n i ii ■ ■ i t i ' - ill — ' ■■ ' ti ■ " )'. ;'.::.M kcv. - ; :o : .- 

Department of Health and Human Services 

-tor Centers for Disease Control Division - CO/AIDS Div 

• nc: Person Russ Clapp/Scott HolmberR Section AIDS Office 

-ess 1600 Clifton Road Contact Person Tin Piland 

Atlanta, GA 30333 Telephone 554-9132 

•:nt Requested S i , 794,405 Application Deadline 7/17/92 



From 11/1/92 To 10/31/93 Notification Expected 10/1/92 



<h Commission 6/16/92 Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Board 



. . em Description: Request to (apply for) ^EOptsnrkecoceHr^ a (ntrx) (continuation) (aik>ci±x^^3Ug«eftffi©§«x^g) 
- wr-" -"*> grant in the amount of S 1 .794.405 from the period of 11/1 /92 to 10/31/93 

to provirie Epi Studv of Natural History of HIV/AIDS in Homosexu aj.^-;-.,; 

and Bisexual Men Previously Enrolled in Hepatitis B Infection Studies 

• H TTI TTl 2 f v T t Coe=CJV^i*wvN'; =«<2 .<2<tu*crf: cc^rxr- * r"*-7» »«"-^: «*iaj u^ p . u .idcn ) 

^ase see attachments. 



Outcomes/Objective?: 
:ase see attachments. 



.- ".ffget" al R echini"" ar Termination of Xhtst Funrk- 

^ lure to apply for these funds would -jeopardize San Francisco's ability to attact 

-i eral ATDS research funding. 

■ r inanci2l Information: 

Col. A Col. B Col. C ' Col. D Rec. Match At?:>rov-d b' 

Two Yti-s Ago ?ist Yc2r/0rig. • Proposed Ch2ng: 

-nt Amount ' 2,197,996 7.052.128 1,794,405 

'-oanel 1 -381 .986 1 .472.565 



: ? meDt 9.700 17,084 BUDGET IS IN DEVEL OPM ENT: IT W ILL B: 

Tact Svc. 33Q.813 59.750 



& Supp. 31 .800 56,555 INCLUD ED IN THE RE QU EST TO ACC EPT AND EXPE ND 

lities/Space 81 ,426 75,418 

-r 138,520 137,015 

-ect Costs 224,251 233,741 ; 



-,^^.^, 4,500 9,150 

Personnel 



CSC 25.00 21.55 

CSC 

1 r actual 



"'e(s) of non-graDt funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on tbis gran:: 
-"e^ 



:ra.-.; fenced employes be retained after tbis grant terminates? If so, Ho"? 



.'.; , rnn;- ?f ;iiai <; «■ r v j r >< ■ Open Bid renewal of Sole Source , ti!io<« 

RFP #032-89 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lq - File 146-92-43 



Department: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
AIDS Office 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health, 
AIDS Office, to accept and expend a supplemental grant of 
$39,501 from the Health Resources and Services 
Administration to augment the Ryan White Comprehensive 
AIDS Resources Emergency (CARE/Title I Formula) 
Disaster Relief Grant; waiving indirect costs and providing 
for ratification of action previously taken. 

$39,501 

February 1, 1992 through January 31, 1993 

Federal Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources 
Emergency (CARE/Title I Formula) Disaster Relief Grant 

AIDS Disaster Relief Assistance 

The Ryan White CARE/Title I Formula Grant provides 
disaster relief assistance to localities that are 
disproportionately affected by the AIDS epidemic. As one of 
those localities, the Department of Public Health (DPH) has 
applied for and received, pursuant to previous resolutions 
approved by the Board of Supervisors (File Nos. 146-91-86 and 
146-92-14), $8,309,963 in grant funds for the period February 1, 
1992 through January 31, 1993. The acceptance and 
expenditure by DPH of $8,309,963 was approved by the Board 
of Supervisors on March 27, 1992 by Resolution No. 223-92. 

DPH reports that the actual grant award is $8,349,464, which 
is $39,501 more than the amount authorized by Resolution 
No. 223-92. The proposed resolution would authorize DPH to 
accept and expend retroactively the additional funds in the 
amount of $39,501. 

The allocation of CARE funding is determined by the HIV 
Health Services Planning Council, whose members are 
appointed by the Mayor. The Planning Council has endorsed 
the allocation of the additional $39,501 to the Volunteer Legal 
Services Program of the Bar Association of San Francisco, to 
provide legal services to low-income, HIV-positive 
immigrants and refugees residing in San Francisco. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

56 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Budget: 



No. of Persons 
Served: 



Indirect Costs: 



Comments: 



Contractual Services 
Bar Association of San Francisco 

Administrative Costs 
Telecommunications 



$37,525 



1.976 



Total 



$39,501 



Required Match: None 



The funds will permit staff and volunteers at the Bar 
Association to provide 4,433 hours of legal consultations. 

Indirect costs are not allowed under the CARE legislation. 
Therefore, the proposed resolution would specifically waive 
indirect costs. However, the grantor would permit 5 percent 
of the total grant award, or $1,976, to be applied to the City's 
administrative costs (see Comment No. 2). 

1. DPH has already incurred costs associated with the CARE 
grant for the period February 1, 1992 through January 31, 
1993. In addition, DPH reports that CARE funds must be 
expended in a timely fashion, and that expenses may be 
incurred against this proposed supplemental grant prior to 
approval by the Board of Supervisors. Therefore, the 
proposed resolution provides for ratification of actions 
previously taken. 

2. As noted above, 5 percent of the grant amount, or $1,976, is 
budgeted for administrative costs. DPH reports that these 
funds would be used to offset DPH costs for telephone 
charges. Significant telephone charges are expected because 
DPH will have primary responsibility for coordinating data 
management at study sites in three cities, and will transmit 
large amounts of data to CDC mainframe computers using 
computer modems attached to telephone lines. 

3. DPH has submitted Disability Access Checklists for the 
AIDS Office and the Volunteer Legal Service Program of the 
Bar Association of San Francisco. 

4. The Summary of Grant Request submitted by DPH is 
attached. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

57 



ncaiin t fimnn^sion - Mitmnarv ot (jrnnt Request Rev. 4/1 C. 90 



Health Resources and Services Administration 

Health and Human Services Division CO/AIDS Div 

Person Libbv Hartnett Section AIDS Office 

HRSA; 5600 Fishers Lane Contact Person Tim Piland 

Rockville, MP 20857 Telephone 554-9132 

\mount Requested S S39 , 501 Application Deadline n/a 

rerm: From 2/1/92 To 1/31/93 Notification Expected n/a 



..(act 
ddrcss 



Health Commission 6/2/92 Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Board 



\. Ttem Description: Request to (zpptytfot) (accept and expend) a (tfliw£^«^rcKKk»£(aa)Sc2tk5fi£ (augmentation to a) 
(cwc.pp.opri.*->*) grant - m the 2moml fs 39,501 from the period of 2/1/92 to 1/31/93 

to provide supplemental funding to Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS services. 
Resources Emergency (CARE/Title I Formula) Disaster Relief Grant 

SUTTl TT1 3TYj ( CcScaftuiary p ee d addr c s yxi ; ct=bcr ♦ pocpa >crv«!; jcr^ica mod provider* ) 

These funds will be used to provide AIDS/HIV legal services to low-income, HIV+ imm igrants 
and refugees residing in San Francisco and to enhance administrative telecommunicat ion 
costs. Please see next page for a brief explanation of the funding mechanism. 



III. Outcomes/Objectives: 

These funds will provide 4,433 hours of volunteer or staff hours of legal consultat ion 
to 1 ow-incoTTie . HIV+ immigrants or refugees residing in San Francisco. 

IV. Effects of Reduction or Termination of These Funds: 

Failure to accept and expend funds will impair the AIDS Office's ability to address 
the need stated above. 

V. Financial Information: 

Col. A Col. B Col. C Col. D Reg. Match Approved hv 

Two Years Ago Past Year/Orig. Proposed Change 

Grant Amount 6.393,866 8,309.963 8,349,464 + 39,501 . none 

Personnel 266,547 352.892 352,892 

Equipment 22,300 13,500 13,500 

Contract Svc. 6.074.173 7.894,465 7,931,990 + 37,525 

Mat. & Supp. 1,003 2,000 2,000 

Facilities/Space 12,768 19,000 19,000 



Telecommunicati on 17,075 28,106 30,082 + 1,976 
Indirect Costs ' 



■YI, Pat? Processing 

(c^bd^cd.^.) 22.300 13.500 13,500 

VTT. Personnel 



F/T CSC 


5 







6.60 


of 


6.60 












P/T CSC 


















Contractual 
















on 


this 




Source(s) of 
None . 


non-grant 


funding 


for 


salaries 


CSC employees 


working 


part-time 


grant: 





























Will grant funded employees 


be retained 


after this 


grant terminates? If so, 


Ho«? 






No. 














5VTTT. Contractual Services: 


Open Bid 


X 
'139-91 


Sole Source 


I .1 ...c .,.. 


cc. ic.ih R*<\i< % fax 1 M 


... 
















58 









Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lr - File 146-92-44 



Department: 
Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 
Project: 

Description- 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
AIDS Office 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health, AIDS 
Office, to accept and expend a supplemental grant of $420,851, 
which includes indirect costs in the amount of $45,418, based 
on 20 percent of salaries, from the Centers for Disease Control, 
to fund the HD7 Incidence in Homosexual/Bisexual Males 
Research Project; providing for ratification of actions 
previously taken. 

$420,851 

June 1, 1992 through October 31, 1992 (five months) 

U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) 

HIV Incidence in Homosexual/Bisexual Males Research 
Project. 

The HrV Incidence in Homosexual/Bisexual Males Research 
Project is a proposed new activity of the existing Epidemiologic 
Study of the Natural History of HIV/AIDS in Homosexual and 
Bisexual Men sponsored by the CDC. A proposed companion 
resolution has been submitted (Item lp - File No. 146-92-41 of 
this report) concerning continued funding for the existing 
Natural History of HrV/AIDS research project. 

The proposed resolution would authorize the DPH to accept 
and expend retroactively grant funds in the amount of $420,851 
in order to estimate the number of homosexual and bisexual 
men at potential vaccine-trial recruitment sites who are HrV- 
negative but who are at high risk of HIV infection, and to 
examine issues which could affect clinical trials of potential 
vaccines. DPH has identified a number of recruitment sites for 
such a study population, including the City's Sexually 
Transmitted Disease (STD) Clinic, and an existing study group 
of individuals engaging in high-risk behavior. 

According to DPH, the research project is not a clinical trial of 
potential vaccines, but an effort to obtain preliminary d;it;i on 
the feasibility of conducting such trials in San Francisco. The 
objectives of the project would be to determine the incidence of 
HIV infection among patients at the STD Clinic and Health 
Center No. 1, to study the relationship of specific biological and 
behavioral factors to infection with HIV, to evaluate the 
potential for recruitment of clients at the health clinics in 

BOARD OF SUPKKVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



59 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Budget: 



future trials of HIV vaccine, and to identify cultural, 
psychological, or social factors that may enhance or 
discourage enrollment and participation in vaccine trials. 

DPH previously submitted an application for grant funding for 
this project in the amount of $820,000, pursuant to Board of 
Supervisors Resolution No. 306-92, approved on April 24, 1992. 
Funding in the amount of $420,851 has been awarded by the 
Centers for Disease Control for the five-month period from 
June 1, 1992 through October 31, 1992. 

The proposed research project would involve substantial 
testing, interviews, counseling, and individualized follow-up 
with participants. Information would be obtained concerning 
each participant's risk behaviors, substance use, STD history, 
interest in and reservations about prospective vaccine trials, 
and responses to psychosocial and cultural factors influencing 
behavioral change. 

Antibody tests for HIV infection would be administered to 
participants and post-test counseling would be provided. This 
counseling would include discussion of risk avoidance, as well 
as appropriate referrals to health and social service agencies. 
Group workshops would also be provided. In order to enhance 
the retention of participants in the study group, participants 
would receive stipends for each interview at which they 
appear. Focus groups and advisory panels would be created to 
advise the research staff of community concerns and other 
issues, including cultural issues which could affect 
participation in vaccine trials by members of minority groups. 



Pers 


onnel* 


FTE i 
1.0 


\mount 


2232 


Physician Specialist 


$37,818 


2804 


Epidemiologist III 


1.0 


24,447 


1874 


Sr. Programmer Analyst 


1.0 


22,738 


2810 


Principal Disease Control 








Investigator 


1.0 


20,879 


2808 


Sr. Disease Control 








Investigator 


1.0 


18,608 


2806 


Disease Control Investigators 


3.0 


60,579 


1426 


Secretary II 


1.0 


14,583 


1426 


Senior Clerk Typist 


1.0 


14,583 


1807 


Management Information 








Systems Technician 


1.0 


12,137 


2930 


Psychiatric Social Worker 


0.04 


718 




Subtotal 


11.04 





$227,090 

* Includes 1 month at 1991-92 salary level and 4 months at 1992-93 salary 
level for the period June 1, 1992 to October 31, 1992. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

60 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Fringe Benefits @ 26 percent 



$59,043 



Travel 
Local 

Atlanta, Georgia 
Subtotal 


$1,050 

5,000 


6,050 


Equipment 

Computer Equipment for the STD Clinic 

Computer Manuals 


9,150 
250 


9,400 


Materials and Supplies 
Office Supplies 
Filing Cabinets 

Telephone answering machine 
Clinic Supplies 
Educational Supplies 
Laboratory Supplies and Tests 
Subtotal 


2,225 
1,400 
250 
2,950 
1,850 
16,500 


25,175 


Rent Support 
25 Van Ness Avenue 
356 Seventh Street 
Subtotal 


8,820 
6,075 


14,895 


Telephone Support 
Local 

Long Distance 
Subtotal 


4,170 
1,650 


5,820 


Postage and Courier Services 




1,460 


Photocopving/Reproduction/Slide Reproduction 


3,000 


Promotional Costs 




2,175 


Staff Training 




1,600 


Focus Groups and Client Incentives 




19.725 


Total Direct Costs 


$375,433 


Indirect Costs @ 20 percent of salaries 




45.418 


Total Grant Amount 




$420,851 



Required Match: 



None. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

61 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Indirect Costs: $45,418 based on 20 percent of salaries. 

Comments: 1. DPH reports that expenses will have been incurred against 

the proposed grant, prior to approval by the Board of 
Supervisors for acceptance and expenditure of these funds, 
because the proposed resolution was not submitted in a timely 
manner, due to a death in the family of the AIDS Office Grants 
Manager. The proposed resolution therefore would provide for 
ratification of actions previously taken. 

2. The proposed grant budget includes $9,150 for 
microcomputers and software for the STD Clinic, as well as 
$250 for computer manuals. The proposed computer 
equipment purchases have been reviewed and approved by the 
Electronic Information Processing Steering Committee. 

3. A Disability Access Checklist has been submitted for the 
AIDS Office of the Department of Public Health. Disability 
Access Checklists are on file for the STD Clinic and Health 
Center No. 1. 

4. The Summary of Grant Request submitted by the 
Department of Public Health is attached. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

62 



v^< 



n r «', i u i 



Centers for Disease Control 
'Contact Person Russ C la pp/S rorr Holmhprg 
Address CDC Atlanta GA 30333 



(404) 842-6640 



Division - 

Section 

Contact Person 
Telephone 



CO/AIDS Div 



AIDS Office 



Tim Piland 



554-9132 



Amount Requested S 
Term: From 

Health Commission 



420,851 



To 



Application Deadline 5/15/92 
Notification Expected 6/ 1 /9? 



6/2/92 



10/31/92 

Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Board 



Item Description: 



Request to (xpepdyjferi (accept and expend) a ^wfcfexflfc««Wft9t^lteMHftec) (augmentation to a) 
grant in the amount of S 420,851 from the period of 6/1/92 to 10/31/92 

in nmvirif. HIV Incidence in Homosexual/Bisexual Males Research P roject servic- 
(supplemental to Epi Study of Natural History of HIV/AIDS in Homosexual/Bisexual Men) 

7 1 S W m HI 2 r v : t rn-rr .^uarv; nee^ ajI^ttw?; cc=S>er ♦ J7TW=» w=>^: *=~ic=u i^l p.u » " « ^L-i ) 

Please see attachment . 



ITT. Outcomes/Qhiecti ves: 

Please see attachment, 



TV. Effect nf Reduction or Termination of Tb><? Fu"rf'- 

Failure to accept and expend these funds may jeopardize San Francisco's ability to 
attract federal AIDS research funding and, in particular, prevent participation in 
future vaccine trials. 



V. Financial Information: 
Col. A 



Iwo YiiTS Age 



Grant Amount 
Personn el 
Equipment 
'Contract Svc. 
Mat. & Supp. 
Facilities/Sp ace 
Other 
Indirect Costs 

VT. Pat? Prorp< 



VTT. 



>••:: 



Frr esc 
prr esc 

Contractual 



Col. B 
Pzsi Yc2r/0rij. 



1.186.432 
7.934 

59.750 
31.380 
60.523 
96.935 
188.323 



21.55 



Cnl. C 

Proposed 



17.084 



59,750 



56.555 



75,418 



137.015 



9,150 



Col. D 

Change 



1.631. 777 2.052.128 420.851 



1,472.565 286.133 



9, 150 

0_ 

25.175 
14.895 
40.080 



233,741 45.418 



9,150 



Reo. Match 



Approved bv 



approx 1 1 . 5 for five months 



Source(s) of noD-»rani funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this grant: 

Non-:- . 

Will grant funded employees be retained z'.itr ibis gran: terminates? If so, How I 

No. 



VHI. Contract u?,! Server*: Open Bid none 



Sole Source none (•'■ 



. tv: ia^=?u 



63 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Items Is and It - Files 146-92-45 and 146-92-46 



Department 



Items: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 



Department of Public Health (DPH), 
Community Public Health (CPH) 

Resolution (File 146-92-45) authorizing the adoption of the 
1992-94 Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan and Budget and 
supplemental perinatal outreach plan. 

Resolution (File 146-92-46) authorizing the Department of 
Public Health, to accept and expend a State grant allocation, 
which will include indirect costs equal to 13 percent of 
personnel costs, from the State Department of Health 
Services, provided that the Department of Public Health 
expends the funds consistent with the 1992-94 Comprehensive 
Tobacco Control Plan and Budget, and the supplemental 
perinatal outreach plan and budget. 

$2,127,666 

State Department of Health Services Tobacco Tax (AB 99) 
monies administered by the Tobacco Control Section and the 
Maternal and Child Division (Perinatal Outreach Activities). 



Term of Allocation: January 1, 1992 to June 30, 1994 (See Comment #1) 

Project: Tobacco Control Plan (AB 99) 

Description In January of 1991, the Board of Supervisors authorized the 

DPH to apply for, accept and expend $1,595,327 in grant funds 
for Phase III of the Tobacco Control Plan, for the period 
January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992. Phase III involves the 
implementation of a Comprehensive Community Tobacco 
Intervention Program. This Program is aimed at 
supplementing existing City and community-based services 
to target local tobacco control programs to the populations 
identified by State, including out-of-school youths, pregnant 
women, and women with young children and minorities. 
Additionally, the Program emphasizes tobacco use 
prevention, discontinuance of tobacco by current and 
relapsing smokers, and increasing compliance with existing 
ordinances controlling tobacco use in public facilities, the 
worksite and eating establishments. The proposed $2,127,666 
would be used by DPH to extend the Comprehensive 
Community Tobacco Intervention Program (Phase III), 
which expires on December 31, 1992 through June 30. 1994 
The Department advises that the extended program would 
continue to be based on program services, policy and media 
activities aimed at the reduction of tobacco use Perinatal 
Outreach Activities would also he provided with the proposed 

BOAKI) OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

64 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

AB 99 monies to fund tobacco control outreach activities to 
perinatal providers, who provide care during the late stages 
of pregnancy and early stages of infancy. 

Local Match: None 

Indirect Costs: A total of $127,932 in indirect costs, consisting of $107,402 or 

15 percent of total Personnel, including fringe benefits for the 
Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan and $20,530 or 10 
percent of salaries for Perinatal Outreach Activities. The 
State Tobacco Control Section allows 15 percent of total 
personnel costs plus fringe benefits for indirect costs, and the 
Maternal and Child Division allows 10 percent of salaries 
only for indirect costs for Perinatal Outreach Activities (See 
Comment #3). 



Project Budget: 







Domprehensive 


Perinatal 






Tobacco 


Outreach 






Control Plan 


Activities 


Personnel 


FTE 






Medical Social Worker 


0.75 


$ - 


$13,008 


Senior Health Educator 


1.25 


82,112 


— 


Senior Environmental 








Health Inspector 


0.50 


32,896 


- 


Mental Health Educator 


0.85 


40,175 


— 


Health Educator 


2.25 


125,764 


— 


Health Worker III 


1.50 


35,432 


16,156 


Medical Specialist 


0.20 


16,149 


-- 


Assistant Health Educator 


4.00 


28,287 


92,434 


Health Worker II 


0.40 


12,760 


— 


Secretary I 


2.25 


42,460 


45,974 


Clerk Typist 


0.10 


1,833 


~ 


Senior Clerk Typist 


1.13 


40,460 


- 


Senior Accountant 


0.56 


30,691 


— 


Registered Nurse 


0.20 


9,257 


- 


Contracts Compliance 








Officer 


0.56 


25,890 


— 


Outreach/Health Program 








Coordinator 


2.13 


61.383 


37.720 


Total Salaries 


18.63 


$585,549 


$205,292 


Fringe Benefits 




130.464 


57,480 


Total Personnel 




$ 716,013 


$262,772 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

65 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Comprehensive Perinatal 

Tobacco Outreach 

Control Plan Activities 



$ 107,402 $20,530 



Indirect Costs 

(15 percent of Personnel, 

including fringe benefits 

for the Comprehensive Tobacco 

Control Plan and 10 percent 

of salaries for Perinatal Outreach 

Activities) 

General Expenses 29,250 8,850 

Includes general office supplies, 
telephones, postage, printing and 
duplicating 

Rent 43,432 14,860 

Rental of existing office space at 
1540 Market Street 

Equipment Rental 1,200 

Lease of copier 

Travel 8,398 

Local travel consistent with 
State guidelines 

Training 7,389 

Training per State guidelines and 
for Youth Peer Training Program 

Educational Materials 15,800 

Includes educational games, 

pamphlets, posters, videos and 

incentives for youth serving clinics, 

and for health promoters 

training project 

Media/Promotions 8,000 1,950 

Promotions for the Cinco de Mayo 

Festival, and promotional items 

such as pens, magnets, bags, balloons 

Contractual Services 470,444 393,387 



1,350 



2,363 



2,450 



BOAKDOFSUrKKVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

66 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Comments: 



Comprehensive 

Tobacco 

Control Plan 



Perinatal 
Outreach 
Activities 



Other Expenses 

Includes honoraria for focus groups, 

health promoters, typesetting and 

artwork 

Subtotal 



$ 11.826 $_ 



Total Project Budget 



$1.419.154 $708.512 
$2,127,666 



1. AB 99 requires that the State begin allocating Tobacco Tax 
monies to local jurisdictions prospectively (prior to the 
provision of services), on a quarterly basis, as opposed to 
disbursing these monies on a cost reimbursement basis. 
Therefore, although the proposed grant period began on 
January 1, 1992, because the DPH has not yet expended any of 
these funds, the proposed resolution does not have to be 
amended to authorize the DPH to expend any of these funds 
on a retroactive basis. The DPH did not have to apply for the 
proposed AB 99 allocation. 

2. The Board of Supervisors previously authorized the DPH to 
accept the proposed grant funds (File 146-91-84), but did not 
authorize the DPH to apply for and expend these funds until 
the DPH formulated its Tobacco Control Budget and Plan. 
The proposed resolutions (Files 146-92-45 and 142-92-46) would 
provide the Board of Supervisors with the DPH's Tobacco 
Control Budget and Plan for its consideration. However, the 
Board of Supervisors previously authorized the DPH to accept 
an allocation in the amount of $1,063,009 (File 146-91-84), and 
as noted above, the proposed grant funds are in the amount of 
$2,127,666. This increased allocation of $1,064,657 ($2,127,666 
less $1,063,009) to the DPH is a result of extending the 
allocation through June 30, 1994 and as a result of an 
amendment to State law to require that at least one third of 
the health education tobacco tax funds be allocated to local 
health jurisdictions to be used for perinatal outreach 
services. 

3. The proposed resolution specifies that 13 percent of 
personnel costs would be used for indirect costs. However, as 
noted above, a total of $127,932 in indirect costs, consisting of 
$107,402 or 15 percent of total Personnel including fringe 
benefits for the Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan and 
$20,530 or 10 percent of salaries for Perinatal Outreach 
Activities is included in the proposed grant funds. Therefore, 
the proposed resolution (File 146-92-46) should be amended to 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



67 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



indicate that indirect costs totalling $127,932 are included in 
the proposed grant funds, consisting of the amount of 
$107,402 or 15 percent of total Personnel including fringe 
benefits for the Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan, and 
$20,530 or 10 percent of salaries for Perinatal Outreach 
Activities. 

4. Ms. Alyonik Hrushow of the DPH reports that the 
proposed Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan, which the 
proposed resolution would adopt (File 146-92-45), would focus 
on institutionalization of interventions and policy activities, 
with the goal of creating a smoke free environment in San 
Francisco. These policy activities would be developed into a 
City-wide policy and media campaign that would be 
implemented through a contractor during the period of 
approximately August 1, 1992 through July 30, 1993. The 
proposed plan (File 146-92-45) was developed according to 
State guidelines which are based on the National Cancer 
Institute Planning Model for tobacco control. This national 
model focuses on three interventions, policy, media and 
program services. These interventions are to be delivered 
through a community network, community environment, 
healthcare providers, worksite and schools. Ms. Hrushow 
reports that an example of a policy activity would include 
education at the point of businesses with the goal of reducing 
tobacco sales to minors and point of purchase and outdoor 
advertising of tobacco products. In addition, Ms. Hrushow 
indicates that a workplan would be implemented by the State- 
mandated Tobacco Free Coalition, which includes the 
formation of a policy committee to advocate for smoke-free 
policies and a media committee. The Perinatal Outreach 
Activities program would encompass the above-outlined 
activities and be directed towards providers of perinatal 
services. Because the proposed Comprehensive Tobacco 
Control Plan includes policy activities for creating a smoke 
free environment in San Francisco, the Budget Analyst 
believes that approval of the proposed resolution (File 146-92- 
45) is a policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. However, 
given that the proposed resolution (File 146-92-46) would 
authorize the DPH to accept and expend an allocation which 
is consistent with the 1992-94 Comprehensive Tobacco Control 
Plan and Budget and supplemental perinatal outreach plan, 
if the Board of Supervisors approves this proposed resolution 
(File 146-92-46), then the proposed resolution (File 146-92-45), 
which would authorize the adoption of the 1992-94 
Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan and Budget and 
supplemental perinatal outreach plan should also be 
approved. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

68 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

5. Although the DPH already has several existing 
contractors which provide services under Phase III of the 
Tobacco Control Plan, the additional services which would be 
provided through contractual services have not yet been 
identified. Therefore, a total of $863,831 should be reserved 
for contractual services (consisting of $470,444 under the 
Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan and $393,387 for the 
Perinatal Outreach Activities program) pending the 
identification of contracts, the MBE, WBE status of the 
contractors and finalized contract cost details. 

6. Attached is a Summary of Grant Request, as prepared by 
DPH, for this proposed State allocation. 

7. The DPH has prepared a Disability Access Checklist which 
is in the file. 

Recommendations: 1. Because the proposed Comprehensive Tobacco Control 
Plan includes policy activities for creating a smoke free 
environment in San Francisco, approval of the proposed 
resolution (File 146-92-45) is a policy matter for the Board of 
Supervisors. However, if the Board of Supervisors approves 
the proposed resolution (File 146-92-46), which would 
authorize the DPH to accept and expend an allocation which 
is consistent with the 1992-94 Comprehensive Tobacco Control 
Plan and Budget and supplemental perinatal outreach plan, 
then the proposed resolution (File 146-92-45) should also be 
approved. 

2. Amend the proposed resolution (File 146-92-46) to indicate 
that indirect costs totalling $127,932 are included in the 
proposed grant funds, consisting of $107,402 or 15 percent of 
total Personnel including fringe benefits for the 
Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan, and $20,530 or 10 
percent of total salaries for Perinatal Outreach Activities. 

3. Amend the proposed resolution (File 146-92-46) to reserve a 
total of $863,831 for contractual services (consisting of 
$470,444 under the Comprehensive Tobacco Control Plan and 
$393,387 for the Perinatal Outreach Activities program) 
pending the identification of contracts, the MBE, WBE status 
of the contractors and finalized contract cost details. 

4. Approve the proposed resolution (File 146-92-46) as 
amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

69 



" ' v I 



Crjnior Cn 1 i 1 . Dept. of Health Services DlvUion . Public Health 

Conmi rtrt0P Irene Reveles-Chase S.eilon Health Promotion 

Act,,;, California Dept . of. Health Service s CoMltl Person Aivonik Hrushow 

P .O. Box 942732, Sacramento, CA 95 814 7 eltp hoot 35-^-9155 

Amount Requested S 2,127 ,666 Application Deadline June 30 ' 1992 

...... r , . August 15, 199! 

N o 1 1 f i c i : i o n Lr peeled b ' 



Health Commission Doard of Supervisor:: Finaocc Committee . 

Full Board 

T. Itf-n Pr^rriniin!-; R-qucsi to . ac cep t an, additional allocation of. $1 ,.Q64,657 and expend a total 
u^'wi—- --*•> allocation Li the amounl of S 2, J27 ,666 from the period of Jan 1 , 1992 vo June 3U, 1994 
toprpvid; tobacco control and perinatal outreach ::.-.•:::;:. 



This plan and budget incorporates the existing Tobacco Control Plan covering Jan. -Dec. 
1992 and a new pnase of the plan covering Jan. 1993 - June 199- . The new pr.ase wo-uic 
provide tobacc o control services through 5 channels of intervention ioilowmg state 
guidelines.: (l)healtn care system, (2) worksites, (3~ ) schools , U*~) community network and 
(3) community environment , is . changing social norms related to tobacco use, sale a promo tion. 
Fne Supplemental Perinatal Outreacn Plan "will inform low income, predominantly minority 

women and the^.r families about the importance of earlv and routine perina tal care. 

TTT. Onrmmpq / Oh j pm' VP9 : . 

Tobacco control objectives are 1") to institutionalize tobacco prevention and cessation ser vices 
tnrougn the health care, worksite! school and community network channels and 2) to "edu ce 
promotion and sale of tobacco to minors through the community environment, e.g. bv educa ting 
merchants. Perinatal objectives are 1) to develop a community-based site for informatio n 
referral and assistance with medical applications and 2) improve perinatal outcomes. 

IV. Effects of Reduction or Termination of These Funds: 

Activities in proposed plan would not be implemented. 



bras: a=oi; = : 1,603,952 i, 595,327 2,127,666 532,339 

Personnel 641,790 652,914 978,785 325,871 

kecissec: 1,635 29,795 0_ 29,795 

Co:::;:: Svc. 699.435 652,824 863,831 211,007 

M^.. £: Su?=. 63.749 61,872 81,337 19,465 

Facilities/Space 21.000 32,960 58,292 25,332 

b:her 80.074 67,025 17,476 49,549 



■ee: Cess-.s 96.269 97,937 l2/,94j 30,008 
14,606 7,701 7,701 



7rr CSC H l J_ 

P/T CSC 8 9 



2,127 


666 


978 


785 





863 


831 


81 


,337 


58 


,292 


17 


,476 


127 


,94^ 





11 


17 






Eovr:c;s) of =03-jrs = t ruadir.j rcr salaries z'. CSC employees —z:\.\~i = i.-:::=e :- 

Bureau of Environmental Health, State Mental Health Grant, SFGH, C?HS, r r PA 



^Vi!l 

No 



"C:: t re s : o •■ t r j :. e ::::i:cc 



'JJ. Cptz Hid A Sole Scarce 



PLEASE NOTETHAT ALL CONTRACTORS FOR THE J AN. -DEC. 199 2 PERIOD HAVE BEEN CH 
THESE ARE THE CONTRACTORS FOR WHOM DISABILITY ACCESS CHECKLISTS HA\ 
TRACTORS FOR THE JANl-JUNi i" c >4 PERIOD WILL BE CHOSEN BY TH 

70 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lu - File 152-92-2 



Department: 
Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Grant Period: 
Project Title: 
Description: 



No. of Program 
Participants: 

Grant Budget: 



Required Match: 



Sheriff 

Resolution authorizing the Sheriff of the City and County of 
San Francisco to apply for, accept and expend continuation 
State grant funds in the amount of $84,558 made available 
through the Office of Criminal Justice Planning. 

$84,558 

California Office of Criminal Justice Planning (OCJP) 

July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

San Francisco Sheriffs Drug Abatement Project 

The Sheriffs Drug Abatement Project, known as the Anti- 
Drug Abuse (ADA) Home Detention, confines prisoners in 
their residence except for periods when they are at work, 
traveling to and from work and other designated brief 
periods. Such prisoners have been convicted of drug use 
and/or the sale of small quantities of drugs. The prisoners' 
compliance with the in-home detention is verified by random 
phone calls to the prisoner's home and an electronic bracelet 
confirming the prisoner's presence in his or her home. ADA 
Home Detention participants report in person at least three 
times a week to an assigned Deputy Sheriff for urinalysis to 
detect drug/alcohol use. Each prisoner also receives 
mandatory counseling and evaluation for substance abuse. 



Personnel 



8304 Deputy Sheriff (1.00 FTE) 
8274 Sheriffs Cadet (.50 FTE) 
Fringe Benefits 
Subtotal 


$43,576 
19,779 
14.000 


$77,355 


Operating Expenses 

Travel 

Audit 

Subtotal 


$1,550 
1,500 


3,050 


Indirect Costs 




4.153 


Total 




$84,558 


None 






ROARDOF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 






71 







Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Indirect Costs: $4, 153 (4 .9% of the total grant) 

Comments: 1. The proposed grant amount of $84,558 is $8,089 or 10.6 

percent more than the 1991-92 grant amount of $76,469. 

2. The Sheriffs Department advises that, contingent upon the 
identification of another source of funds, if grant funds are 
terminated or reduced, grant personnel will be terminated or 
reduced accordingly. 

3. The proposed continuation grant is one of four Drug 
Abatement Projects included in this Report to the Finance 
Committee of July 8, 1992, as follows: 

File Grant 

Number Amount 

Adult Probation 130-92-4 $188,400 

District Attorney 138-92-4 330,812 

Police Department 143-92-3 137,962 

Sheriff* 152-92-2 84.558 



$741,732 



Subject of the proposed resolution. 



4. It is possible that if additional funds are made available by 
the State Office of Criminal Justice Planning, this grant 
could be augmented at a later date. According to the Mayor's 
Office, such additional funds would be used to extend the 
grant period. Because the State may need to appropriate these 
funds quickly, a delay may result in loss to the City of those 
additional fines. Therefore, the proposed resolution contains 
in the body of the legislation, the phrase "including any 
extensions or amendments thereof so that the grant may be 
extended in a timely fashion. If approved, the Sheriffs 
Department would not have to request approval of the Board 
of Supervisors to apply for, accept and expend any future 
augmentation to this grant. As such, the Budget Analyst 
believes that approval of the proposed legislation is a policy 
matter for the Board of Supervisors. 

5. The application deadline for this grant is June 9, 1992. 
Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
authorize the Department to apply for the proposed grant 
retroactively. 

6. Reference to indirect costs in the amount of $4,153 is 
included in the body of the legislation but not in the title of the 
legislation. Therefore the proposed legislation should be 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

72 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

amended to reference indirect costs in the amount of $4,153 in 
the title of the legislation. 

7. Attached is the "Summary of Grant Request", as prepared 
by the Sheriffs Department, for the proposed grant. 

8. A Disability Access Checklist has been prepared by the 
Department and is included in the file. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution, which includes 
authorization of any extensions or amendments without 
subsequent approval by the Board of Supervisors, is a policy 
matter for the Board of Supervisors. Should the Board of 
Supervisors approve the proposed legislation, it should be 
amended (1) to authorize the Department to apply for the 
proposed grant retroactively and (2) to reference indirect costs 
in the amount of $4,153 in the title of the proposed legislation. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

73 



-— '""'""»«" iei_ inu: H514 PQ2 AttacJ 

No. , ... - ftinuinary of < I ran t Reques t i:-- . •;iu,M)] 



Office of Criminal Justice Planning 



■•• ni/'W 

San Francisco Sheriff's Qi 



, T. niM 7i c- CouTvty Parole 

Contact i'crson JudV O'Neal Section £ r _L 

Addrcss 1130 K Str eet, Suite 300 ConIi)C( ,. frson K ev.n Foster 



Sacramento. CA 95814 Telephone L4J.5L.553r 1591 

taA ceo „ June y, 1992T 

Amount Requested S 5>O a > ,03° Application. Deadline 

Term : Prom 07/01/92 To gggg 3 NcIificali on K.pected 



Wealth Commission Hoard of Supervisor*: finance Committee 

Full Hoard 



I. Item Description: Request to (apply for) (accept and expend) a (new) (continuation) (allocation) (."Uigmcniation to a) 
,ewcy «**-« ~« gTani [„ lhc ^ oml f s 84,558 _ from , nc period f 07/01/92 _ t0 , . 06/30/93 

io provide services. 

tt Summarvj <c«*«.vii-'*r 7 .»«d-'V»r« J »«i ; .o^> • t^p kt^j. «r.-"» «viprovufcn) 

See attached program description of Sheriff's 

Ant i -Drug Abuse (ADA) Home Detention Program. 



III. Outcomts/Ohiectives: 

Reduction in recidivism of participants and reduction 

in jail overcrowding by treeing a daily average of 15 jail beds. 

TV, Fffects of Reduction or Termination of These Funds: 
. Nr> prngram. 



V. Financial Information 



Grant Amount 


Co 

T»< 


1- A 

Yejur A jo 




Col, p. 

P»st Yeat/Orij. 

76,469 


Personnel 







55,720 


Equipment 










Contract Svc. 










Mat. & Supp. 







10,926 


Facilities/Space 




6 





Other 







3.000 


Iodlrect Costs 







3,823 


YI. Data Processing 

(on bci«4al*k°»0 








YI1. Personnel 
F/T CSC 







2 


P/T CSC 







"0 


Contractual 











Col. C 

Proposed 

84 , 558 

77,355 




Col, 

Chi^c 

+ 8 
+ 24 


D 

,089 

,914 















-10 


,926 








3,050 
4,153 


+ 


50 
530 








2 


+ 


.5 





"0 - 











Reo. Match Approved by 



Source(s) of noD- E ra D t funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on tbis gram: 



Not app I i c a b I e . 



Will grant funded employees be retained after tbis grant terminates? If so, Ho* 



Contingent o n availabl e funoinq. 

1 VIII . rnntr « f JJUl_St£*icxi; Open Hid. Sole Source tJ—— .^onu^-f-F- 

Ik 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item lv - File 146-92-38 



Department: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description: 



Project Budget 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
AIDS Office 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health to 
apply for, accept and expend a grant of $99,534 from the 
Health Resources and Services Administration to fund the 
Field Test of the Uniform Reporting System Project; waiving 
indirect costs and providing ratification of action previously 
taken. 

$99,534 

June 1, 1992 to May 31, 1993 

Health Resources and Services Administration 

Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency 

(CARE) Disaster Relief funds 

Field Test of the Uniform Reporting System Project 

The proposed grant would fund a project to attempt to 
establish a more accurate and reliable system of tracking 
Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (CARE)-funded 
units of service. The project would aim to avoid duplication 
and gaps in the provision of AIDS services. 

The proposed grant would consist of $4,740 for 
Telecommunications, which would include funds for a 
dedicated computer line, and $94,794 for Contractual Services 
for a total of $99,534. The proposed budget for Contractual 
Services would be as follows: 



Personnel 

Data Entry Operators 

(1,440 hours at $12/hour) 
Fringe Benefits (25 percent) 
Total Personnel 


$17,280 
4,320 


$21,600 


Equipment 
Computer Hardware 
Computer Software 
Total Equipment 


38,957 
10.523 


49,480 


Consulting Services 




L9.200 



BQABDQE SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

75 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Contractor Indirect Costs 

Subtotal Contractual Services 
Telecommunications 
Total Grant 

Required Match: None 

Indirect Costs: None (Indirect costs are not allowed by the funder.) 



$4£14 

$94,794 

4.740 

$99,534 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



1. The DPH advises that the Department was notified of the 
availability of funds on April 14, 1992. The application 
deadline was April 27, 1992. Since the DPH has already 
submitted the application for the proposed grant, the 
proposed resolution authorizes providing ratification of 
action previously taken. According to the DPH, no expenses 
have been incurred against this award prior to approval of 
the Board of Supervisors, and the Department does not 
anticipate expending funds against this grant until Board of 
Supervisors approval is received. 

2. The proposed grant would be the first year of a one-year 
grant. If the proposed field test is successful, grants could be 
made available in ensuing years for an entire project. 

3. The Department has not yet selected a contractor. 
Therefore, the accept and expend provisions of the grant 
should be deleted pending information regarding the hours, 
rates, and MBE/WBE status of the contractor. 

4. The $38,957 budgeted for computer hardware would 
include 12 personal computers and hardware to support a 
computer network. The $10,523 budgeted for computer 
software would include word processing, spreadsheet, and 
databased programs. The Department has received EIPSC 
approval for the proposed purchase of computer hardware 
and software. 

5. A Summary of Grant Request Form, as prepared by the 
DPH, is attached. 

6. A Disability Access Checklist has been prepared by the 
Department and is in the file. 

Amend the proposed resolution to delete the accept and 
expend provisions of the grant pending information 
regarding the hours, rates, and MBE/WBE status of the 
contractor, and approve the resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

76 



ftLLaL i.lUtUl L 



Hcnlth rommi55ion - Summnrv of Grant Request 



Rev. 4/10/90 



grantor 



Health Resources and Services A dmin Division CO/AIDS Div 

Zont.act Person Glenna Wilcom Section AIDS Office 

Address HRSA; 5600 Fishers Lane Contact Person Tim Piland 

Rockville, MP 20857 Telephone 554-9132 

Amount Requested S 99,534 Application Deadline 4/27/92 

rerm: From 6/1/92 To 5/31/93 Notification Expected 5/27/92 

-lealth Commission 6/2/92 Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Board 



I Ttem Description: Request to (2pply for) (accept and expend) a (new) (KrxMiimaiJDnJ^2ikx3QDn)^2Dgc2c«{2tk>a<s:c) 
(&-Jc .pjxopri. -»*> gTan[ ^ ^ amount f s 99,534 from the period of 6/1/92 to 5/31/93 

tnprovide Field Test of the Uniform Reporting System Project services 

This project is an attempt to establish a more accurate and reliable system of tr acking 
Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (CARE)-f unded units of service to avoid du plication 
and gaps in the provision of such services. Please see attachment for detailed hi story /need 
for this project . 

[TT. Outcomes/Objectives: 
To provide a uniform reporting svstem for service agencies which are currently coll ecting 
and reporting service provision data through undercomputerized or manual methods in an 
effort to eliminate duplication and/or gaps in service provision. 

V, Fffects of Reduction or Termination of The^e Funds: 
Failure to apply for, accept, and expend these funds would seriously impair our ability 
to maximize the utilization or resources for people with AIDS/ARC in San Francisco. 

V. Financial Information: 

Approved hv 



Col. A 

Two Years Ago 
Grant Amount 


Col. B 

Pasl Yeir/Orig. 


Col. C 

Proposed 

99,534 


Col. D Recr. Match 
Change 


Personnel 






Fqnlprn(>nt 


Contract Svc. 




94,794* 




Mat. & Supp. 






Fa r i li t i«"s7Sp.lrf 


Other (telecommunications) 




4,740 




indirect Costs 








VI. Dntn Proce"in» 






*See attached budget 


YJLL__P_CIinil[JLd 

1-7 i CSC 









17T CSC 









("out I :ulli:il 




'inn 





Sourcc(.s) of noti I'.r.uit (muling for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this grant: 



Will i;r:iiu (undid rm|>loyr< '■• rrtaineil iftii this. jm.hh liTiniimti-.'.' II so, !l<> 



v ! ! L. ' J.'.' ul I .I'.'.'j :.' Sulf ' \ 

OllO '• '• t ho p. 1 : i I i I |'.. I Ml); .ii'i-iu H". v.- I 1 I t'<- UOS il'.ll.l t I'll . i :. .1 

iii . .imiii-i' i h i ■■ I .■.i.i .mom t will In ti 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lw - File 146-92-37 



Department: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description 



Required Match: 



No. of Persons 
Served: 



Department of Public Health 

Community Public Health Services (CPHS) 

Family Health Bureau 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health to 
apply for, accept and expend a grant of $470,769, which 
includes indirect costs in the amount of $20,530 based on 10% 
of allowable salaries and a required match in the amount of 
$318,913 which is 67.7% of the total award, from the State 
Department of Health Services, Maternal Child Health 
Branch for Perinatal Outreach Services, and to execute a 
contract with the State for $470,769 and any amendments 
which do not increase this amount. 

$470,769 

July 1, 1992 though June 30, 1994 (two years) 

State Department of Health Services 
Maternal Child Health (MCH) 

Perinatal Outreach Services 

The proposed State Grant would provide funds for the 
management and coordination of the Department of Public 
Health's perinatal outreach service. The overall goal is to 
reach pregnant women and maintain these women in 
prenatal care. Specific program services include: (1) 
developing a City wide campaign, including the use of the 
MCH tollfree line, to increase the number of women seeking 
early prenatal care; (2) improve perinatal outcomes for 
African American women and their infants by identifying 
those African American women with no prenatal care at the 
county hospital; (3) offering an incentive program to keep 
women in prenatal care programs; (4) establish a MediCal 
assistance center for predominantly Hispanic immigrant 
women; (5) plan and coordinate outreach activities, train 
providers, and evaluate the outreach program. 

$318,913 from the Health Education Fund of the Tobacco 
Control allocation for the City and County of San Francisco. 



2,000 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

76 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Project Budget 



Indirect Costs: 
Comments: 



FY 1992-93 FY 1993-94 



FTEs Budget FTEs Budget 



Personnel 

Outreach Coordinator 1 

Health Worker .5 

Social Worker MSW .5 

Acct. Clerk/Typ. 1 

Asst. Health Educator .23 

Subtotal Personnel 

Fringe Benefits @ 28% 

Total Personnel 3.23 



$31,437 
8,078 
8,055 
5,305 

5.418 



$31,434 

8,078 

16,108 

5,304 



58,293 60,924 

16.322 17.058 

$74,615 3 $77,982 



Operating Expenses 

Travel 525 

Training 1,225 

Rent 5.670 

Total Operating Expenses $7,420 



General Expenses 

Office Supplies & Telephone 1,400 

Photocopying & Printing 4,375 

Promotion 2,025 

Educational Materials 1.875 

Total General Expenses $9,675 

Contracts 

Outreach 63,750 

Translation: 2,500 

Patient Assistance 50.000 

Total Contracts $116,250 

Indirect Costs 10319 

Project Total 218,279 



525 
617 

6.840 
$7,982 



63,750 

2,500 

80.000 

$146,250 

10.211 

252,100 



$20,530 

1. Ms. Virginia Smyly of the Department of Public Health 
reports that the State Department of Health Services, 
Maternal Child Health Branch's policy for indirect costs 
(administrative overhead), limits claims to 10 percent of 
salaries, excluding benefits. In addition, the State 
Department of Health does not allow indirect costs on some 
portions of the proposed grant. Ms. Smyly advises that 
although the indirect costs in this grant proposal appear to be 
greater than 10 percent of allowable personnel salaries, this 
is not actually the case. The Department of Public Health 
stipulated that for this proposal, which is a portion of a larger 
award, the indirect costs should be calculated based upon the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



79 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

allowable personnel salaries from the total award. The 
amount of $10,319 in indirect costs for the 1992-93 budget is 
based on an amount of $103,191 in total allowable personnel 
salaries. The amount of $10,211 in indirect costs for the 1993- 
94 budget is based on an amount of $102,111 in total allowable 
salaries. Of the $470,769 grant $20,530 would go to cover 
indirect costs. 

2. The proposed resolution lists the grant amount as $470,769, 
based on preliminary budget calculations. According to Ms. 
Smyly the Department of Public Health has revised their 
budget calculations and has determined that the grant 
amount should be decreased from $470,769 to $470,379. These 
changes are reflected in the above budget and are also 
reflected in the amount of required match funds that the City 
provides. The Department of Public Health has determined 
that the match should be increased from $318,913 to $318,968. 
Because the percentage of match varies according to the 
individual line items, changes in the grant amount are not 
directly proportional to changes in the match amount. 

Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
reduce the grant amount listed in the title and the body of the 
resolution for the proposed grant from $470,769 to the amount 
$470,379, and the required match amount should be 
increased from $318,913 to the amount $318,968. 

3. The Department of Public Health, Community Public 
Health Services Division, Family Health Bureau has already 
applied for the proposed grant because submission of the 
proposed grant application was June 5, 1992. Therefore, the 
proposed resolution should be amended to permit the 
Department to apply for the proposed grant retroactively. 

4. According to Ms. Smyly, AB 99, the Tobacco Control Act 
requires that 33% of the Health Education Fund allocation be 
used to fund perinatal outreach services. This proposed 
grant would represent approximately 50% of the 33% 
required by AB 99. 

5. The "Summary of Grant Request" as prepared by the DPI! 
is attached. 

6. The Department of Public Health has completed a 
"Disability Checklist" which is attached. 

Recommendation: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to reflect a decrease in the 

grant amount from $470,769 to $470, .575), and an increase in 
the required match from $318,913 to $318,968. 

HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

80 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



2. Amend the proposed resolution to change the title and the 
body of the resolution to allow the Department of Public 
Health, Community Public Health Services to apply for the 
proposed grant retroactively. 

3. Approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



mi ,c 



Sons carmw^ 
lit- - Street. Suite 7dQ 



ith Bre nrl 



- ! v I : ! o 



Sac-.--pnto. r.A 04?-^. 7? ; 

Rcoues'.cd S ^70. 7fiC 

^• : --°- -QZZG1Z22_ To .Qi^/aa 

[tilth Commission 



TDW<; 



Cor.^c: Person _l iroinig Sm vj_v 

7 ' ' c ? - -1 o = « 55^-2553 

Applicztlos Dcidiinc ___JlUl£_j2. 10C9 ** 
Nc;iric;:ior. Z-?ec:cd _ 



I it m n ' r ' j!! Dosrd 



10 P rovid = ^ Bgrjnataj outreach service 







^^^^^Si^mdmmmMM- 




' :: Zr u T\:z:;. , : ,o„ fu „ ds/ ,. 



ne '• i ■ , eque: : ed . ; I 






Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lx - File 146-92-38 



Department: 
Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
Community Public Health Services (CPHS) 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health to 
accept and expend a continuation State grant of $377,803 
which includes indirect costs in the amount of $7,046 based 
on ten percent of allowable salaries and a required match in 
the amount of $55,971 which is 14.8 percent of the total award, 
and to execute a contract with the State for $377,803 and any 
amendments which do not increase this amount. 

$377,803 

July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

State Department of Health Services 
Maternal Child Health (MCH) Branch 

Comprehensive Perinatal Services Program 

The proposed State grant would provide funds for the 
management and coordination of the DPH's Comprehensive 
Perinatal Services Program (CPSP) and to enhance and 
maintain Maternal/Child Health activities. Specific program 
services include: (1) providing technical assistance to health 
care providers in order to enable them to enroll low-income 
women in Medi-Cal funded perinatal services; (2) providing 
public information about the availability of Medi-Cal funded 
perinatal services; (3) recruiting additional health care 
providers to offer such services and; (4) providing on-going 
quality assurance and in-depth technical assistance to those 
health care providers that are currently offering these 
perinatal services. 

The proposed State grant would also provide funds for the 
continuation of a toll-free MCH referral service which was 
implemented in 1991-92 and is located in the DPH Child 
Health Disability Program (CHDP) office. The proposed 
grant would fund a part-time bilingual health worker. This 
toll-free service is mandated under the Federal Ombudsman 
Budget Reformation Act (OBRA '89) which requires States to 
provide low-income individuals who lack phones free access 
to information on available health care services. This toll- 
free service arranges appointments for individual perinatal 
services. It also makes referrals to services available under 
the Women, Infants and Children (WI(') Program, which 
provides nutrition, education and supplemental foods to 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



pregnant women and children under the age of five who are 
receiving medical care. Finally, it gives referrals to services 
available under the Child Health Disability Program (CHDP), 
which provides routine health screening to children up to age 
13. 

The proposed grant would also fund the Black Infant Health 
(BIH) program designed to increase community awareness 
of black infant health needs through the implementation of 
focus groups, creation of educational and promotional 
materials, recommendations for the use of video and other 
media, and assistance in implementation of events. 



No. of Persons 
Served: 



Approximately 3,500 Medi-Cal eligible women 
Required Match: $55,971 (see Comment No. 4) 
Indirect Costs: $7,046 ( see Comment No. 6) 

Project Budget 



Personnel 


FTE 






CPSP Coordinator, LCSW 


.75 


$39,796 




Sr. Med. Social Worker, LCSW 


.75 


36,096 




Health Educator, MPH 


.55 


36,997 




Data Clerk/Specialist 


.50-.55 


18,482 




Clerk Typist/Admin. Asst. 


.50-.75 


15,125 




Information Specialist 


0.05 


8,416 




Clerk Typists 


1.15 


31,200 




Public Health Aide 


NA 


5,000 




MCH Director (MD) 


.15 


13,808 




Perinatal Director 


.50 


27,196 




Nutrition Consultant 


.35 


18,306 




Quality Assurance Coordinator 


m 


5,005 




Subtotal Personnel 


5.31-5.61 


$255,427 




Fringe Benefits @ 27 percent 




69,324 




TOTAL PERSONNEL 




$324,751 


Travel 






3,000 


Training 






3,000 


Consultant Services 






15,000 



General Expenses 

Beeper Rental 

Toil-Free Line (Rental Fee, and 

Toll Charges) 
Advertising 
Bus Campaign 



$1,200 

5,108 
2,796 
3,350 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

84 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Phone Set $75 
Incidental rental of PA/Sound System 

and other equipment needs 562 

Promotional material design & printing 1,083 

TOTAL GENERAL EXPENSES $14,174 

Operating Costs 

Materials and Supplies (postage, reproduction 
office supplies, journals, memberships, 
and educational materials). 8,067 

Indirect Costs 9.811 

Project Total $377,803 

Comments: 1. Ms. Virginia Smyly of the DPH reports that the $15,000 for 

Consultant Services provides for one Registered Nurse (375 
hours at $40 per hour) to monitor program quality, including 
chart review and assessment of care according to 
Comprehensive Perinatal Services requirements and DPH 
recommendations. The Registered Nurse would also provide 
consultant services in scheduling, patient flow, training, and 
other related duties. 

2. According to Ms. Smyly, $99,500 of the proposed $377,803 
grant is the base amount guaranteed by the State for the 
Comprehensive Perinatal Service Program. An additional 
$33,875 of the proposed grant would be allocated to Black 
Infant Health (BIH). Ms. Smyly reports that the State 
Department of Health Services has already agreed to grant 
the DPH the base $99,500 and the $33,875 BIH funds, for a 
total of $133,375. 

3. Ms. Smyly advises that the remaining $244,428 of the 
proposed $377,803 grant would be Federal Title XLX matching 
funds. The Federal matching funds would be distributed 
through the State Department of Health Services. Ms. Smyly 
advises that pending review and, if necessary, minor 
corrections by the State Contract Manager, the DPH expects 
the State Department of Health to grant the $244,428 
matching funds. 

4. The County is required to pay $55,971 of in-kind matching 
funds for the proposed grant. The $55,971 County match is 
not included in the total project budget. 

According to Ms. Smyly, the $55,971 pays for a portion of the 
MCH Director, the Perinatal Director, the Nutrition 
Consultant, the Quality Assurance Coordinator, and the 

BOARD OK SUPKKVISC >KS 
lUTIXJHT ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Clerk Typists. Ms. Smyly reports that the $55,971 is included 
in the DPH's 1992-93 budget from the General Fund and 
would be expended whether or not the City were awarded the 
proposed grant. Therefore, no additional City funds would be 
expended to provide the $55,971 County match. 

5. $24,000 of the $377,803 total grant, which includes .5 FTEs 
at $10,696, $280 for bilingual pay, $1,070 in indirect costs, 
$7,683 in general expenses and the toll-free line, $2,278 in 
fringe benefits, and $1,993 in overhead costs, would be 
allocated to the continuation of the toll-free telephone referral 
line described above. 

6. The proposed resolution includes indirect costs in the 
amount of $9,811, based on preliminary budget calculations. 

The proposed resolution states that indirect costs are based 
on ten percent of salaries, excluding salaries and wages 
under the Federal Comprehensive Perinatal Services 
(Enhanced Activities Services). However, the State 
Department of Health does not allow indirect costs on some 
portions of the proposed grant, including Enhanced Perinatal 
Services and some portions of the Black Infant Health Grant. 
According to the final budget submitted by the DPH, indirect 
costs were calculated based on ten percent of salaries and 
wages allowed by the State Department of Health. This 
includes $41,145 salaries and wages from Title XTX Federal 
matching funds, $29,699 from Comprehensive Perinatal 
Services funds, $10,696 from the toll-free referral line funds, 
and $16,567 from Black Infant Health funds, for a total of 
$98,107. The State Department of Health Maternal Child 
Health Branch allows a maximum indirect cost of ten 
percent of allowable salaries and wages, or $9,811. 

Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
change the indirect costs listed in the title and the body of the 
resolution for the proposed grant from the amount of $7,046 to 
the amount of $9,811 based on ten percent of salaries and 
wages allowed by the State Department of Health. 

7. The 1992-93 proposed grant award of $377,803 represents 
no change from the 1991-92 grant of $377,803. 

8. The DPH advises that if grant funding is reduced or 
terminated, personnel would be reduced or terminated 
accordingly. The proposed grant provides for 5.31-5.61 FTEs. 

9. The "Summary of Grant Request" as prepared by the DPH 
is attached. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

10. The "Disability Access Checklist" as prepared by DPH is 
contained in the file. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to increase the indirect 
costs from the amount of $7,046 to the amount of $9,81 1. 

2 Approve the proposed legislation as amended. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

87 



Attachment 




ate Dept of Health Services 
a ternal Child Health Branch 
Doris Barrows 



714 P Street, Suite 740 
Sacramento. CA 94234-7320 



D I v 1 1 1 o = 

Sec: Io a 

Con'.ac: Person 

T c 1 1 3 h o : c 



CPHS 



Famil v Heal th 



Virginia Smvly 



554-2563 



/t --Requested S . 
-.'„™ 07/01/92 



377,803 



r rom 
/alt Commission 



06/30/93 

Board 



N/A 



AppllCS'.los Deadline JlinP 5. 1992 

Kotlficsiion Expected 

of Supervisors: Finance Committee 
Full Board 



y llrro PfSCrlplinn; 



Request io £$#pH) ( 2 ccept 2nd expend) 2 $£%) (cor.rinu2rion) (2l]oeauon) CtK&MX&K&aH^ 
gram in the amounLof S 377,803 from the period of 07/01/92 10 06/30/93 
inpro^^ _-;'prpnatal and related service: 

This grant is the MCH block grant which provides for funds to implement the Compre- 
hensive Perinatal Services Program and related -services in San Francisco^ ensuring 
comprehensive carp for low-income women in the city. Approximate! v (3^500 Avomen are 
affected through provider training and assistance to over 20 Drovider~qroups. 



TTT. Outcome e/Qb'f ctivt*: 1 ~"*\ 

To ensure comprehensive perinatal- services and adeguate care to low-income families^ 

I 'to provide appropriate'ttefHreTated referrals, and to inform the community about 

\ Black infant health needs. ; - 



TV, r.n>rt* of ^'-duct'or' 



aai; 



of Tn.c -tind*: 



The CPSP program in San Francisco will be disrupted and/2,500 >omen wi 1 1 not be 
assured comprehensive services. ^ -^ 



r ir>2Tic?2l Tnforme tio~: 



Grz.nt Amount 


Col. A 
7^o Ye^rs Ago 

224,383 

186,218 




Col. B * 

?«: Yeir/Orit. 

377,803 

315,475 

5.082 

16,975 

26.123 




Col. c 4 • 

Proposed 

377,803 

324,751 

n 


Col. D 

Cr.i.-.j:: 




Personnel 

Eouiumtnt 


9276 
5082 


Contract Svc 
Mat. Sz SupD. 


13.400 



J.5,000 

19,898 



1957 
f\??5 


Faci)ities/Sp2ce 







Other 
Indirect Costs 


11.700 
1,164 


5,200 
8,948 

ded 

5,082 

1.0 
6.32 

.25 


11.108* 
_J-406 _• 

ftravei, tra: 


5908 
1902 


VT. n ?T , Prnr-c, 


:in» * amen 


Ln^ng and com 


(t^-o k^JcJc^.oc^,) 







VTT. o, rtnn „., 





' 1.0 




r/T CSC 





?/T CSC 


4.55 


6.32 


■ 


Coc.r2c:uil 


.25 


.25 






Bee. M2tc"n AjgBrnvge m 



v '-l Sraat funoed employees be refined z.Cer ibis -mr.: :e.- = i=;les? If so, Hovr? 

No 



V"TT. _r„,- ? r 



i^UL£^aiil_Sj 



Opt: 



Sole Source 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lv -File 148-92-4 



Department 
Item: 

Grant Amount: 

Source of Grant: 

Required Local 
Match: 

Description; 



Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Works to 
apply for, accept and expend Federal funds for pavement 
renovation. 

$7,257,000 

Federal Surface Transportation Program 

$1,828,000 

The proposed grant would fund the construction of nine 
pavement renovation projects shown in the Attachment. 

The total estimated cost of the nine projects shown in the 
Attachment is $10,096,000. A summary of the total estimated 
cost allocation is as follows: 

Desig n Construction Total 



1987 Street Improvement 








Bond Fund Interest* 


$376,000 


$602,000 


$978,000 


Federal Surface Trans. Funds 








(This Grant Request) 




7,257,000 


7,257,000 


Gas Tax Funds 


453,000 




453,000 


Half-Cent Sales Tax 


182.000 


1.226.000 


1.408.000 



Total 



$1,011,000 $9,085,000 $10,096,000 



* Approved through a supplemental appropriation in April, 1992 (File 
101-91-63) 

Indirect Costs: None, grantor does not permit indirect costs. 

Comments: 1. According to Mr. Joe Ovadia of DPW, the $1,011,000 

budgeted for DPW design services would be completed by 
existing DPW staff. Mr. Ovadia reports that approximately 
20,220 hours would be provided by DPW staff at an average 
rate of $50. 

2. Mr. Ovadia reports that DPW has not yet selected the 
contractors for the construction services. Mr. Ovadia 
anticipates that a Request for Proposal (RFP) for tin- 
construction contracts would be issued in January of 1993. In 
April of 1992, the Finance Committee placed $585,000 then 
budgeted for construction on reserve from the 1987 Strict 
Improvement Bond Fund Interest (Pile 101-91 63) pending 
finalized cost details, and the MBE and/or WBE status of the 

BOARD OF SUPKKVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

89 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

contractors. The proposed resolution to apply for, accept and 
expend $7,257,000 in Federal funds is also for construction 
services. As such, because contractors have not been 
selected, the $7,257,000 should be placed on reserve pending 
finalized cost details, and the MBE and WBE status of the 
contractors. 

3. Mr. Ovadia reports that design services began April, 1992 
and will be completed in December of 1993 and construction 
would occur from February, 1993 through December, 1993. 

4. Mr. Ovadia reports that the $453,000 in State Gas Tax funds 
have already been received by DPW. Mr. Ovadia also reports 
that DPW submitted a portion of the $1,408,000 Half-Cent 
Sales Tax funds in DPW's FY 1992-93 application to the 
County Transportation Authority and another portion will be 
submitted in DPWs FY 1993-94 application to the County 
Transportation Authority. Mr. Ovadia indicates that DPW 
receives approximately $4 million annually from Half-Cent 
Sales Tax funds. 

5. Reference to indirect costs as not permitted as part of this 
grant is included in the body of the legislation but not in the 
title of the legislation. Therefore, the proposed legislation 
should be amended to reference indirect costs as not 
permitted in the title of the legislation, and therefore waiving 
indirect costs. 

6. The Disability Checklist has been prepared by the 
Department and is included in the file. 

7. The Department has reported that these Federal Surface 
Transportation monies are funded on a formula allocation 
based on population. As such, the City is not required to 
submit an application to receive these funds. The proposed 
resolution should therefore be amended to delete the apply for 
provision. 

Recommendations: Amend the proposed resolution to 1) reference the waiving of 
indirect costs since such costs are not permitted in the title of 
the proposed legislation 2) reserve the $7,257,000 pending 
finalized cost details, and the MBE and WBE status of the 
contractors and 3) delete the apply for provision. Approve the 
proposed legislation as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

90 



Attachment 







> 


















o> 




Cs 




C\ 


C\ 


o> 


CN 


CN 


o 


b-. 






g 


















o 




Cn 




a 


CN 


Ov 


o, 


C3\ 






















o 




Od 




Co 


Co 


Co 


>o 


Nl 


& 


o 


























VI 




Co 


« 


cc 


Co 


■O i 


c> 




"^ 


* 


















r*i 




r*i 




ftl 


ft] 


ftl 


to 


ftl 1 




> 


to 


















nJ 


-_ 


~_ 


- 


q 


^ 


_u 


H; 


"U 








5 
to 

O 

5: 

to 

ft] 

3; 
ftj 
ft] 

1 

s 

fcj 

hi 

S3 

o 


Q 

to 
Co 

-4 

>i 

ft] 
ft] 

to 
5: 

Co 
Co 

-J 

O 

to 

53 

ftl 

Co 

S 
o 


5: 

ft] 

o 
o 

S» 
-^ 
ft] 

Co 

M 
| 
fti 

-J 

3 


ft] 
Co 

to 

— . 

Co 

CO 

O 
< 

3 
3 

5 


b 

Co 

M 

13 
to 

2 
3 

3 


5 

<: 

3 


to 
> 

Q 

5j 


C 

to 

to 

V- 

5 
5 

si 


3 

3 

Co 

to 

Co 
-j 

to 

o 

Co 

O 

5 

Co 

O 
3 


Co 

to 

s 

53 

to 

Co 

to 

to 
ftl 

—a 

o' 

> 

Co 
Co 

O 
3 


53 

Q 
C; 

Co 

r- 


o 
> 

5; 

H 

53 

ft] 
5: 

Q 


Co \l 

y y 

Co Co 

^ "B 

3 ^ 

Co PI 

£2 CJ 


Co 

is 
n 

ft: 

3 

n 
is. 


53 

ft] 

o 

1 

3 

e 


ftl 

2 

3 


ft 
ftl 

it 

ft" 
§ 

o 

> 

Q 

to 

o 

> 

3 

cl 

5: 


Co 

o 

Co 

1 

to 
to 

Co 

to 

to 
O 

t-o 

Co 


Q 
to 

Co 

to 
to 

| 
ft- 

to 
o 

to 
fi 

to 


its 


^3 

1 


•H 


3 




o 
s 


Co 

O 

3 














-2 
o 






ft" 
Co 

3 


3 


o 

1 


to 








o 


o 




~_ 
















5: 






















H 


n 




.2 






































fc 


■J3 










































^> 








































b 






CO 




















5 

Co 


Co 




M 

$a 






io 

c3 


Co 
Co 


in 

Co 






^— 1 


Q 


CO 

<co 


















Q 












CS 


Co 


CN 


:>s .. 




CN 

C5 


Q 

o 


















CO 




§ 




C3 


CO 
CO 


CO 

CO 


iO 


H- 


Q> 








































Co . 


^3 










































§ 


S<J 








































a 


^ 


-i""* 


&-4 


•^ 


















'^ 


«o 




v» 




v» 


Vi 


f^ 


'^ 


cv 


b 


Co 
$0. 


lu 


tvj 
























■ J 








Nj 






Ui 


CO 


















3a 


Oi 










-^ 


xo 


VJ 




Co 


9a 


Jo 


















^o 


#. 




p» 




c- J 


S3 


Jo 


CO 


s' 


Q 


CN 


















o 


Q 




a 




<a 


ca 


CO 


<a 


Oq 




<^j 


sa 


CO 


















Q 


C 








cc 


Co 


CO 


CI 




e> 


<a 


Co 


















cs 


<a 




a 




Q 


Co 


CO 


c_. 


^2 




Ql 








































B 

c^ 




&*> 










































^ 


» 


v-» 


**> 


















v» 


•-. 




t. 




in 


•■-. 


••-, 


•-, 


Oct 


tto. 


Kj 


U) 


vj 
.8 

CO 


















1 n 


s 




":\ 






- 1 


"o 


1 


rp 


nTJ 




S3 




















-1 




a, 






ta 


< 1 


CN 

CN 


C 


^ 


O 

o 


ca 


ca 

ca 




























■ 




CN 

■ . 
' ■ 


' 


^ 


c 3 


Q3 










































t~- 




{J 

! a 


to, 

N J 


















<o 


' . 




i ■ 




• 






■ 


o 




PN 


•-■ 


■- 


















o 






' 






> . 




• ■ 


Co 


M 


C3 


■ 


c_, 


















C3 










■ 


■ 


■ • 
■ 




H 





Co 

5 § 

s S 

& o 






§ 

s 

1 

Co 



5 
o 






Memo to Finance Co mmi ttee 
July 8, 1992 

Item lz -File 38-92-17.1 



Item: 



Resolution authorizing the City to accept a gift from Richard 
Goldman, Warren Hellman, John Rosecrans and Alfred 
Wilsey of artistic painting services valued at $24,000 ($6,000 
each) for the decorative painting of temporary plywood 
surfaces in and adjacent to the main rotunda of the San 
Francisco City Hall, and authorizing the firm of Evans and 
Brown to perform such work. 



Description; After the Loma Prieta Earthquake of October, 1989, 

temporary shoring was installed to stabilize the stone 
surfaces in the rotunda and various other locations 
throughout City Hall. The City has subsequently installed 
plywood sheathing over the exposed temporary shoring in 
and around the rotunda. 



Comment: 



Richard Goldman, Warren Hellman, John Rosecrans and 
Alfred Wilsey have offered to provide $6,000 each in order to 
hire the services of the firm of Evans and Brown, professional 
artists, to paint the shoring in a manner that is 
complementary to the esthetics of the rotunda. Payment to 
the firm would be made by Mssrs. Goldman, Hellman, 
Rosecrans, and Wilsey. The gift therefore consists of the 
direct services of the professional artists. The donation would 
include the designing process and the execution of the 
design, in addition to all labor and material costs. 

Mr. Mark Primeau of the Department of Public Works 
indicated that as part of DPW's standard contractor hiring 
process, Evans and Brown would be required to provide proof 
of proper liability insurance coverage. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



KQAKDPl' SUPKKVISPRS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

92 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item laa - File 141-92-2 



Department 
Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description 



Required Match: 



Project 
Budget: 



Juvenile Probation 

Resolution authorizing the San Francisco Juvenile Probation 
Department to apply for, accept and expend new private 
grant funds for the development of a multi-disciplinary 
assessment instrument, classification system and workload 
study; waiving indirect costs. 

$55,000 



August 4, 1992 through June 30, 1993 



San Francisco Foundation 
Kaiser Family Foundation 
Total 



$30,000 

25.000 

$55,000 



Multi-Disciplinary Assessment Instrument 

The proposed grant funds would be used to develop and 
implement new multi-disciplinary assessment and case 
management procedures for high risk juvenile offenders. 
These procedures would enable the Juvenile Probation 
Department to 1) measure accurately and objectively the risk 
youths pose to public safety, and 2) provide the information 
necessary to link individual youth and their families with 
services to interrupt the cycle of juvenile crime. 

With technical assistance provided by a consultant(s), the 
Department would develop sound assessment tools; design a 
classification system based on youths' needs and risk levels; 
train a multi-disciplinary team to conduct assessments and 
develop service plans; analyze Department workload 
management; and design a management information 
system for assessment and case management information. 

$35,000 which is included in the Juvenile Probation 
Department's 1991-92 budget, anticipated to be carried 
forward into FY 1992-93 (See Comment #1). Therefore, the 
total project budget would be a total of $90,000 (consisting of 
$55,000 in proposed grant funds and $35,000 in matching 
funds). 



All of the proposed $90,000 in funds, including the $35,000 
match, would be used for contractual services. 



HOARD OF SLH'KKVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

93 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Indirect Costs: The granting agencies prohibit the use of grant funds for 

indirect costs. Therefore, the Department is requesting that 
indirect costs be waived. 

Comments: 1. According to Ms. Patricia Grice of the Juvenile Probation 

Department, the $35,000 in required matching funds were 
originally anticipated to come from State AB 90 funds, which 
are no longer available to the Department for the required 
match. Ms. Grice reports that the Department's FY 1991-92 
approved budget contained the required matching funds, and 
it was anticipated that these matching funds would be 
returned to the General Fund when the State AB 90 funds 
were received. The Juvenile Probation Department is 
anticipating to request that these budgeted funds be carried 
forward to FY 1992-93. However, the Controller's Office 
reports that until year-end close outs are completed for all 
City departments, it cannot yet be determined whether there 
are sufficient funds available for the required match. 
Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends to continue the 
proposed resolution until it is determined whether sufficient 
carryforward funds are available for the required match. 

2. As previously noted, the total proposed project funds of 
$90,000 (consisting of $30,000 from the Kaiser Family 
Foundation, $25,000 from the San Francisco Foundation and 
$35,000 in matching funds) would be used for contractual 
services. The Juvenile Probation Department reports that a 
contractor has not yet been selected who would develop and 
implement the proposed multi-disciplinary assessment and 
case management procedures. The contractor details, 
including the MBE and/or WBE status of the contractor 
should be specified when the proposed resolution is heard 
again before the Finance Committee. 

3. The Juvenile Probation Department has previously applied 
for the proposed grant funds. Therefore, when the proposed 
resolution is heard again before the Finance Committee, the 
proposed resolution should be amended to authorize the 
Juvenile Probation Department to apply for the proposed 
grant funds retroactively. 

4. Attached is the grant application as completed by the 
Juvenile Probation department. 

5. The Disability Access Checklist is in the file. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

94 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Recommendation: Continue the proposed resolution until it is determined 
whether sufficient carryforward funds are available for the 
required match. 



HOARD OF SITI'KKVISPHS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

95 



Fi'J'.e No . 



Letter of Intent to File a Grant Application 
(submitted in triplicate) 

To: The Board of Supervisors 
Attn: Clerk of the Board 

Request for authorization to submit a grant application as described 
below: 



Department: Juvenile Probation Department 



Contact Person: Fred Jordan, Jr. - Chief Probation Officer 

Project Title: Multi-Disciplinary Assessment Instrument 

Grant Source: San Francisco Foundation,. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation 

Proposed (New / Continuation) Grant Project Summary: 

The Juvenile Probation Department will develop a assessment instrument for high 
risk juvenile offenders. This new method of assessment will make use of a multi- 
disciplinary team, act as a basis for classification, workload analysis and allow 
the formulation of individual treatment plans for targeted youth. This assessmen- 
instrument will evaluate problems, needs and risk to these youth in the areas of 
physical health, mental health, substance abuse, vocational training, academic 
achievement, family dynamics and psychosocial history. 



Amount of Grant Funding Applied for: $90,000 



Maximum Funding Amount Available: $25,000 San Francisco Foundation 

$30,000 request granted w ith K a jser Family Foundation 
Required Matchinq Funds: $35,000 granted from AB-90 monies (in reserve) 

Number of Positions Created and Funded: Depends on principle consultant selects 

and sub-contractors needed 
Amount to be Spent on Contractual Services: Total Amount 

Will Contractual Services be put out to Bid? Yes ~ RFP is being develo ped. 



96 



Pacre 2 



Terra of Grant: 1 year 



S.F. Foundation - March 9, 1992 
Date Department Notified of Available funds: Kai ser Foundation - May 19. 1992 

Application Due Date: Application c omple te - funding awards final 

Grant Funding Guidelines and Options (from RFP, grant announcement or 
appropriations legislation) : 

1) RFP has been developed - draft attached 

2) Publish and circulate in San Francisco community requesting bids 

3) Bidders conference to be' scheduled 

4) Appropriate commissions to be notified 

5) Select review panel 

6) Select principle contractor with emphasis on minority contractors 
based on criteria identified in RFP 

7) Certification of contract 



Assessment of Need for Grant Funding: 

High risk youth are referred to the Juvenile Probation Department for serious 
offenses, repeat offenses and as youth identified as posing a risk to public 
safety. They remain in the Department's custody for 5 to 6 weeks pending case 
dispositions in court. A limited range of services are provided to these youth 
.from other city departments and non-profit agencies. For these youth the Juvenile 
Probation Department would like to develop a new, comprehensive and more 
individualized method of assessing problems, needs and risk to the community. The 
new method would take a multi-disciplinary approach and coordinate the contributions 
of several independent agencies. 




97 



July 8, 1992 

Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 2 - File 124-92-3.1 

Department: Department of Parking and Traffic 

Item: Ordinance amending Section 213 of Part II, Chapter XI of the San 

Francisco Municipal Code (Traffic Code) to provide that in Fiscal 
Year 1992-93 the first $8.0 million will be allocated to the Off-Street 
Parking Fund. 

Description: This ordinance was previously considered and recommended for 

approval by the Finance Committee. On June 29, 1992, the full 
Board of Supervisors rereferred this item back to the Finance 
Committee for further hearings. The proposed ordinance would 
amend Section 213 of Part II, Chapter XI of the Traffic Code. Section 
213 outlines the amount of parking meter revenues that are credited 
to the General Fund and the Off-Street Parking Fund. The proposed 
ordinance would amend this Section to stipulate that in fiscal year 
1992-93, the first $8.0 million in parking meter revenues will be 
credited to the General Fund, instead of $6 million as is currently 
provided for in Section 213, or $2.0 million more annually to the 
General Fund. 

Comments: 1. Parking Meter revenue included in the Mayor's recommended 

1992-93 budget amounts to $12.3 million, an increase of $2.9 million 
over the 1991-92 revenue of $9.4 million. The amount included in the 
Mayor's recommended 1992-93 budget for the transfer to the Off- 
Street Parking Fund is $4.3 million, leaving a transfer to the General 
Fund of $8.0 million for 1992-93. Therefore, if the proposed ordinance 
is not approved, or if the amount of funds transferred to the General 
Fund is reduced from the proposed $8.0 million, the FY 1992-93 
General Fund budget will have a shortfall. 

2. Mr. Tim Johnson of the Department of Parking and Traffic reports 
that the proposed ordinance is considered to be a one-time transfer of 
additional funds to the General Fund. Mr. Johnson notes that the 
proposed ordinance states that the Section 213 would be amended for 
fiscal year 1992-93 only. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for the Board of 
Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

98 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 3 - File 96-92-4 



Department Police Department 

Real Estate 

Item: Ordinance authorizing the sale of surplus City-owned 

property to Mission Housing Development Corporation for 
development of 50 units of low-income senior housing and to 
adopt findings pursuant to Planning Code Section 101.1 

Description: The proposed ordinance would authorize the sale of the 

excess portion of the new Mission Police Station site (located 
on 17th and Valencia Streets) recently acquired from the 
Pepsi Corporation with funds from the 1987 Police Facilities 
Improvement Bond Fund. The excess portion consists of 
approximately 19,878 square feet of land area and a three- 
unit residential building. The property would be sold to 
Mission Housing Development Corporation for $971,904 to 
develop 50 units of low-income senior housing. In addition, 
the proposed ordinance would adopt findings pursuant to 
Planning Code Section 101.1, the Eight Priority Policies. 

In October of 1991, the Board of Supervisors authorized the 
release of $5 million of reserved 1987 Police Facilities 
Improvement Bond Funds to purchase the Pepsi property on 
17th and Valencia Streets for a new Mission Police Station 
and Juvenile Division building, pay title and escrow fees, 
fund the Department of Public Works (DPW's) Bureau of 
Architecture to develop blueprints and to sell portions of the 
property to Mission Housing Inc. The total purchase price of 
the property was $4,805,000. 

Comments: 1. Mission Housing Inc. would purchase the 17th and 

Valencia Street property through a loan financed by FY 1990- 
91 Community Development Block Grant Funds for 
approximately $48.89 per square foot or $971,904. Therefore, 
the net cost to the City to purchase the Pepsi property would 
be $3,833,096 ($4,805,000 less $971,904 = $3,833,096.) 

2. The Mission Housing Inc. intends to use the proposed 
19,878 square foot property to build 50 units of low income 
housing for frail elders living on 50 percent of the median 
income (currently the median income is $34,930 for a single 
person.) Mission Housing Inc. is a nonprofit housing 
development organization which builds low income housing 
in the Mission District. 

3. The proceeds from the $971,904 sale would be transferred to 
the 1987 Police Facilities [mprovement Bond Fund for u*c in 
the construction of the now Mission Police Station. 

HOARD OF SIIPKKV1SORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
99 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



4. The Department of Real Estate reports that the proposed 
sale price of $971,904 represents fair market value. 

5. The Department of City Planning reports that the proposed 
sale is in conformity with the Master Plan and consistent 
with the eight priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1. 

6. Because the Board of Supervisors previously approved the 
Police Department's intent to sell the 19,878 square feet of the 
new Mission Police Station site to Mission Housing Inc. 
when the Board of Supervisors released the $5 million to 
purchase the site, the Budget Analyst recommends approval 
of the proposed ordinance. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

100 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 4 -File 61-92-5 

Department Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Municipal Railway 

Item: Resolution granting extension of time for awarding San 

Francisco Municipal Railway (MUNI) Contract No. MR-898, 
14 Mission Line Trolley Overhead Reconstruction (Phase A 
Persia Avenue to Daly City Loop). 

Description: The proposed resolution would grant an extension of time for 

awarding a MUNI contract for the 14-Mission Line Trolley 
Overhead Reconstruction project (Phase A -Persia Avenue to 
Daly City Loop). The contract work consists of replacement of 
the overhead line for the 14 Mission Line on the Persia 
Avenue to Daly City loop. Section 6.1 of the Administrative 
Code stipulates that award of contracts over $50,000 must be 
made within 60 days after the receipt of bids unless the time 
for the award is extended by a resolution of the Board of 
Supervisors. Bids for the Municipal Railway contract were 
received on April 21, 1992. 

The second lowest bidder on the project, Kingston 
Construction, protested the low bid of Abbett Construction 
Company and Yick Electric Company Incorporated, a Joint 
Venture, on the basis that the Joint Venture did not properly 
implement Disadvantage Business Enterprise Goals (DBE). 
The Contract Compliance Office reviewed the complaint and 
found that the protest was without merit. Due to the time 
necessary to resolve the protest received, the Public Utilities 
Commission was unable to award the contract within 60 days 
following receipt of the bids. 

Comments: 1. Mr. Ken Jew of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

reports that the low bidder, Abbett Construction Company 
and Yick Electric Company, Incorporated, have agreed to 
honor their bid beyond 60 days. Therefore, the proposed 
contract award extension would not result in any additional 
costs to the City. The proposed contract amount is $4,557,516, 
to be funded through the Federal Urban Mass Transit 
Administration. Abbett Construction Company and Yick 
Electric Company Incorporated is a Joint Venture with 50 
percent MBE participation. 

2. Mr. Jew reports that the contract would be awarded two 
weeks after the approval of the Board of Supervisors. Mr. 
Jew indicates that the project would begin ;is soon as the 
contract has been awarded and would be completed in 
approximately one year. Mr. Jew reports that the contractor 
is ready to proceed upon approval of the proposed resolution 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

10 1 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

by the Board of Supervisors. In order to insure that the 
Department has sufficient time, Mr. Jew has requested that 
the proposed resolution be amended to grant the extension of 
time for awarding the proposed contract until August 3, 1992. 

Recommendation: 1. Amend the title and body of the proposed resolution to 
grant the extension of time for awarding the contract until 
August 3, 1992. 

2. Approve the proposed resolution as amended. 






BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

102 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 5 - File 64-92-19 



Departments: Real Estate Department 

Department of Social Services (DSS) 

Item: Resolution authorizing extension of an existing lease of real 

property at 1625 Van Ness Avenue for the Department of 
Social Services. 

Location: 1625 Van Ness Avenue, portion of the second floor premises 

Purpose of Lease: Office space for the Emergency Response Section of the Child 
Welfare Division of the DSS 



Lessor: 

No.ofSq.Ftand 
Cost Per Month: 



Wherco 



14,120 square feet @ $1.56 per square foot, or $22,000 per 
month 



Annual Cost: 



Not to exceed $264,000. 



Percent Change from 
1991-92: None. 



Term of Lease: 



Utilities and 
Janitorial Services 
Provided By: 

Source of Funds: 



Comments: 



Month-to-month basis, for a period not to exceed one year, 
from July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. 



Lessor provides all of these services. 

25% City General Fund (1992-93 Budget) 
50% Federal funds 
25% State funds 

1. Mr. Jerry Romani of the Real Estate Department advises 
that the proposed rent represents fair market value. 

2. The Emergency Response Section of the Child Welfare 
Division has occupied a portion of the second floor of 1625 Van 
Ness Avenue since July 1, 1990. DSS is requesting an 
extension to this lease since space availability at Mill 
Harrison Street has been delayed. 

Ms. Judy Schutzman of DSS advises that the DSS General 
Assistance Program personnel currently occupying IMC 
Harrison Street are still awaiting completion of major 

renovation work at 1235 Mission Street (the Helta Dental 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

103 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Building) before they can relocate to the Mission Street 
location. The Real Estate Department is also recommending 
an extension of the lease at 1440 Harrison Street for fiscal 
year 1992-93 (Item 18, File 64-92-13 of this report). 

3. Ms. Schutzman advises that the major renovation work at 
1235 Mission Street will be completed by approximately 
August 31, 1992, at which time the DSS General Assistance 
Program personnel will move from 1440 Harrison Street to 
1235 Mission Street. 

4. Rents for the Department of Social Services leases are paid 
based on a proportional basis. Proportions paid by the City's 
General Fund versus the State and Federal governments are 
calculated using a formula based on the number of hours 
which social workers expend on various projects. According 
to Ms. Schutzman, the City will be reimbursed by the State 
and Federal governments for 75 percent of the rent for the 
DSS offices at 1625 Van Ness Avenue. 

Ms. Schutzman advises that it is her understanding that 
reimbursement of DSS administrative costs by the Federal 
and State governments is not in any jeopardy as a result of 
the State budget crisis. 

5. Since the above-mentioned lease is to be extended 
commencing July 1, 1992, the proposed resolution should be 
amended to retroactively authorize the extension of the lease. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to retroactively approve the 
extension of the lease. Approve the proposed resolution, as 
amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

104 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 6 - File 64-92-20 

Department: Commission on Aging (COA) 

Item: Resolution authorizing an extension of an existing lease 

Location: 1182 Market Street, Suite 320 

Purpose of Lease: Office space for the Senior Information and Referral 
Program. 



Lessor: 

No. of Sq. Ft and 
Cost per Month: 

Annual Cost: 

% Increase 
Over 1991-92: 



Shorenstein Company 

2,094 square feet at $.85 per square foot or $1,780 per month. 
$21,360 

None 



Utilities and Janitor 
Services Provided by 
Lessor. Yes 



Term of Lease: 
Right of Renewal: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 

Comments: 



Month-to-month Basis 

Yes 

Senior Citizens Programs Funds 

The proposed resolution would authorize the Commission on 
Aging to renew an existing lease for the Senior Information 
and Referral Program on a month-to-month basis. The 
monthly cost is the same amount as the previous fiscal year. 

1. Prior to FY 1991-92, the Senior Information and Referral 
Program was provided by the Department of Public Health 
(DPH) though funded jointly with the Commission on Aging 
through an Interdepartmental Work Order and 
Memorandum of Understanding. For fiscal year 1991-92, 
DPH eliminated the program from its budget. The Board of 
Supervisors reinstated DPH's funding level and placed the 
program within the Commission on Aging. 

2. However, the Program has remained at 1182 Market Streel 
which is approximately four blocks from the Commission on 
Aging's office. COA intends to relocate the Senior 
Information and Referral program to 25 Van Ness to he 
nearer to the COA office and to begin networking their 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

105 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



computer information systems. As such, the proposed lease 
is a month-to-month lease to allow the COA to move the 
Senior Information and Referral Program. The Department 
of Real Estate cannot, at this time, estimate when the Senior 
Information and Referral Program would move to 25 Van 
Ness. According to Mr. Gerald Romani of the Real Estate 
Department, the Senior Information and Referral Program 
move may not be until Spring or Summer of 1993. 

3. According to the Department of Real Estate, the proposed 
lease represents the fair market value. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

106 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item 7 - File 64-92-21 



Department 

Item: 

Location: 

Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 

No.ofSq.Ftand 
Cost per Month: 

Annual Cost: 

% Increase 
Over 1991-92: 



Real Estate Department 

Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Resolution authorizing the extension of an existing sublease 
at 3000 Third Street for the Municipal Railway, for the 
maintenance and storage of buses. 

3000 Third Street 

To store and maintain MUNI buses. 

AVIS Rent-A-Car System 



76,087 square feet at approximately $0,165 per square foot or 
$12,544.24 per month. 

$150,530.88 



5.4% 



Utilities and Janitor 
Services Provided by 
Lessor: None 



Term of Lease: 
Right of Renewal: 
Source of Funds: 
Comments: 



July 1, 1992 though June 30, 1993 

Yes 

Municipal Railway Operating Fund 

1. This space has been subleased for seven years from AVIS 
Rent-A-Car which leases this property from a private party. 

2. According to Mr. Steve Legnitto of the Real Estate 
Department the lease includes provisions for annual rent 
increases in response to increases in the Consumer Price 
Index (CPI). The City is bound by the lease to pay all taxes 
and assessments levied against the property. According to 
Mr. Legnitto, the increase in the rent reflects a 4.15% 
increase in CPI and 1.25% increase in taxes and 
assessments for an overall increase of 5.4%. Mr. Legnitto 
reports that the proposed rent represents the fair market 
value for the property. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



107 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 8 - File 64-92-15 

Department Police Department 



Item: 

Location: 
Purpose of Lease: 
Licensor: 



Resolution authorizing the renewal of an existing revocable 
license for rental of real property. 

450 Seventh Street 

To provide space for parking of police vehicles. 

U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) 



No. of Sq. Ft 

and Cost Per Month: 27,600 total square feet @ $4,048 per month ( 92 parking 
spaces at $44 per parking space). 



Annual Cost: 

% Increase Over 
1991-92: 

Term of Lease: 

Source of Funds: 

Right of Renewal: 

Comments: 



$48,576 

None. 

July 1, 1992 to June 30, 1993 

General Fund 

By mutual agreement between the City and GSA, this 
license is subject to renewal on an annual basis. 

1. The Police Department has included the annual rent for 
the proposed lease in the Department's FY 1991-92 budget. 

2. According to Ms. Claudine Venegas of the Real Estate 
Department, the monthly rental rate of $44 per parking 
space reflects the fair market value for the parking spaces. 

3. Ms. Venegas reports that the parking lot is secured with 
a chain link fence and a locked gate. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

108 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item 9 -File 64-92-16 



Department: 



Item: 



Location: 



Purpose of Lease: 



Lessor: 

No.ofSq.Ftand 
Cost per Month: 



District Attorney 

Real Estate Department 

Resolution authorizing the renewal of a lease of real property 
for the District Attorney's Office 

732 Brannan Street, 2nd Floor 

Office space for the District Attorney's Consumer Fraud and 
Special Prosecution Units 

First California Investments 



Annual Cost: 

% Increase 
Over 1991-92: 

Utilities and Janitor 
Services Provided by 
Lessor: 



8,000 square feet at $1.26 per square foot per month. Total 
cost of $10,083 per month 

$120,996 



No increase over the 1991-92 rent of $10,083 per month 



Term of Lease: 



Janitorial costs are included in the monthly rental rate for 
the property. The City funds the cost of utilities, water and 
scavenger services. 

On a month to month basis for up to one year, July 1, 1992 
through June 30, 1992 



Right of Renewal No 



Source of Funds: 



Comments: 



The annual proposed rent of $120,996 would be funded though 
the General Fund, subject to being approved in the Annual 
Appropriation Ordinance for FY 1992-93. 

1. Mr. Philip Aissen of the Real Estate Department reports 
that the building at 732 Brannan Street does not have an 
elevator and, as such, the second floor is not handicapped 
accessible and the building does not meet seismic safety 
standards. 

2. According to Mr. Bob Perez of the District Attorney's Office 
a search for a site 1 that, was handicapped accessible, mel 
seismic safety codes and was close to the Hall of Justice was 
begun in 1990. A potential site was identified and 
negotiations were begun. However, because of budgetary 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

109 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



constraints, funds for moving expenses are not presently 
available. Mr. Perez estimates moving expenses would cost 
approximately $40,000. Currently, there are no plans to 
continue to look for a new site until funds for such moving 
expenses can be secured. 

3. According to Mr. Aissen there would be no benefit to the 
City by switching to a longer lease period instead of the 
proposed month to month lease. To do this would require 
renegotiating the terms of the lease with the lessor, with no 
assurance that the new lease would be less costly than the 
current lease. Mr. Aissen further stated that the City would 
lose the flexibility to relocate quickly if additional monies 
became available, or a space meeting the DA's needs came on 
market. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed lease. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

110 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 10 - File 64-92-17 



Departments: Real Estate Department for various departments as detailed 

below 

Item: Resolution authorizing renewals and extensions of nine 

existing leases of real property for various City departments 
(see Locations (1) through (9) below). 

(1) Department Employees Retirement System 

Location: 1212 Market Street, Suites B, F and G 

Purpose of Lease: Record Storage. 

Lessor: Bank of California. 

No. of Sq. Ft and 

Cost Per Month: 2,461 square feet @ $.60/sq. ft./month = $1,476.60 rent/month 



Annual Cost: 



$17,719.20 



Percent Change from 
1991-92: None. 



Term of Lease: 



July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 



Utilities and 
Janitorial Services 

Provided By: Utilities are provided by Lessor. Janitorial services are not 

required. 

Source of Funds: Retirement Trust Fund 

*********** 

(2) Department: Police Department 
Location: 948 Pacific Avenue 

Purpose of Lease: Chinatown District site office for the Police Department's 

Senior Escort Service 



Lessor: 



Lin Yu Louie 



No.ofSq. Ft and 

Cost Per Month: 630 square feet @ $1.50/sq. ft./month = $945 rent /month 



BOAKDQKSITPKKVISQKS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1 1 1 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Annual Cost: 



$11,340 



Percent Increase Over 
1991-92: None. 



Term of Lease: 



July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 



Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: Lessor pays for water. The City pays for gas, electricity, 

janitorial and scavenger services. These utilities are 
included in the lease payments of $11,340 per year. 



Source of Funds: 



General Fund - 1992-93 Budget 



(3) Department: 

Location: 

Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 

No.ofSq.Ftand 
Cost Per Month: 

Annual Cost: 



Department of Public Works, Bureau of Building Inspection 
(BBI) 

524 Golden Gate Avenue (entire second floor) 

Administrative offices. 

325 Franklin Associates 

5,500 square feet @ $1.25/sq. ftVmonth = $6,900 rent/month 
$82,800 



Percent Change from 
1991-92: None. 



Term of Lease: 



July 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992 (a six month period) 



Utilities and 
Janitorial Services 

ProvidedBy: The City pays for utilities. The Lessor provides janitorial 

services. 



Source of Funds: 



(4) Department: 
Location: 



BBI Special Funds/Building Inspection Services Fund, 
1992-93 Budget 



*********** 



Fire Department 
744 Harrison Street 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

112 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Purpose of Lease: Office space for the Fire Department's Arson Squad. 

Lesson China Business Associates 

No.ofSq.Ftand 

Cost Per Month: 3,000 square feet @ $1.05/sq. ftVmonth = $3,150 rent/month 



Annual Cost: 



$37,800 



Percent Change from 

1991-92: 5 percent increase 



Term of Lease: 



July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 



Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: The City pays for all utilities and janitorial services. 

Source of Funds: 1989 Proposition A - Earthquake Safety Program Bonds - 
Phase I 



(5) Department: 
Location: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Station E - 19th and Lexington Streets 



Purpose of Lease: DC conversion facility for Hetch Hetchy Water and Transit 
Power Division. 



Lessor: 

No.ofSq.Ftand 
Cost Per Month; 

Annual Cost: 



Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) 

2,170 square feet @ $.50/sq. ftVmonth = $1,089 rent/month 
$13,068 



Percent Change from 

1991-92: 3.7 percent increase 



Term of Lease: 



July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 



Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: Maintenance and water to be provided by PG&E. 

Source of Funds: Funds included in the 1992-93 Hetch Hetchy Project Budgi I 

*********** 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

1 L3 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

(6) Department Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Location: Station J - Leidesdorff Street 

Purpose of Lease: DC conversion facility for Hetch Hetchy Water and Transit 
Power Division 

Lesson Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) 

No. of Sq. Ft and 

Cost Per Month: 1,750 square feet @ $.53/sq. ft/month = $934 rent/month 

Annual Cost $11,208 

Percent Change from 

1991-92: 3.7 percent increase 

Term of Lease: July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: PG&E pays for maintenance and water. 

Source of Funds: Funds included in the 1992-93 Hetch Hetchy Project Budget. 

(7) Department San Francisco Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Location: Southeast corner of Bryant and Division Streets 

Purpose of Lease: Storage area for Municipal Railway (Muni) trolley poles. 

Lessor: State of California, Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 

No. of Sq. Ft and 

Cost Per Month: 18,700 square feet @ $.038/sq. ft./month = $720 rent/month 

Annual Cost: $8,640 

Percent Change from 
1991-92: None. 

Term of Lease: July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Utilities and 
Janitorial Services 

Provided By: The City is required by the lease to maintain adequate 

lighting on the premises. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

114 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Source of Funds: Funds included in the 1992-93 Hetch Hetchy Project Budget. 

*********** 



(8) Department: Fine Arts Museum 

Location: 657 Howard Street 

Purpose of Lease: Office space and condition assessment space. 

Lessor: Crown Point Press, Inc. 

No.ofSq.Ftand 

Cost Per Month: 4,040 square feet @ $1.44/sq. ft/month = $5,833 rent/month 



Annual Cost: 



$69,996 



Percent Change from 
1991-92: None. 



Term of Lease: 



Right of Renewal: 



July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

The City would have the right to renew or terminate the 
proposed lease in each subsequent fiscal year if funds are not 
appropriated. 



Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: All utilities would be provided by the Lessor, except for 

scavenger services, which would be provided by the City for 

approximately $1,200 annually. 



Source of Funds: 
(9) Department 
Location: 

Purpose of Lease: 



Lesson 



1989 Earthquake Safety Bonds 

Fine Arts Museum 

270 E. Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, entire first floor 
and mezzanine 

The Fine Arts Museum has vacated the Palace of the Legion 
of Honor to allow for seismic upgrading of that facility. The 
major portion of the fine art collection is stored at 270 E. 
Grand Avenue. It is projected that the Fine Arts Museum 
will need to store most of the fine art collection at 270 E. 
Grand Avenue through January 31, 1995. 

N. L. Land Associates 



HOARD OK SUI'KUVISPKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

115 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



No.ofSq.Ftand 
Cost Per Month: 

Annual Cost: 



9,640 square feet @ $.90/sq. ftVmonth = 
$104,112 (See Comment No. 7) 



5,676 rent/month 



Percent Change from 
1991-92: None. 



Term of Lease: 

Utilities and 
Janitorial Services 
Provided By: 



Source of Funds: 
Comments: 



July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. 



The City pays for all these costs, which are estimated at 
approximately $2,400 per month. 

1989 Earthquake Safety Program, Phase I Bond Funds 

1. Mr. Lloyd Gardner of the Real Estate Department reports 
that the proposed rents reflect fair market values. 

2. Mr. Gardner advises that although the original version of 
Lease (2) for the Police Department states that the monthly 
rent is to be $992 for the period July 1, 1992 through June 30, 
1993, the proposed resolution states that the rent in Lease (2) 
is $945 per month for fiscal year 1992-93. Ms. Lucy Lui of the 
Police Department and Mr. Gardner were able to 
successfully negotiate with the Lessor to maintain the fiscal 
year 1992-93 rent under Lease (2) at the same level as the rent 
during fiscal year 1991-92. 

3. Mr. Gardner advises that the term of Lease (3) is only six 
months because the City is currently negotiating to purchase 
a building to house all of the Bureau of Building Inspection's 
(BBI) offices and hopes to relocate BBI within a six month 
period. Mr. Gardner reports that the Real Estate Department 
is in the process of negotiating to renew the lease at 524 
Golden Gate Avenue beyond December 31, 1992 on a month- 
to-month basis since it may take approximately nine months 
for the City to purchase a building and prepare it for 
occupancy by BBI. 

4. Mr. Gardner advises that the letter dated May 19, 1992 
from the Real Estate Department to the Board of Supervisors 
regarding the proposed resolution should reflect that Lease 
(6) is for 1,750 square feet at approximately $.53 per square 
foot per month, versus the $.87 per square foot, as stated in 
the letter. In addition, the proposed resolution should be 
amended to reflect that the location of Lease (6) is 222 
Leidesdorff Street. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

116 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



5. Since the proposed resolution erroneously lists the location 
of Lease (9) as 270 E. Grant Avenue, the proposed resolution 
should be amended to correct the location to 270 E. Grand 
Avenue in South San Francisco. 

6. Mr. Gardner advises that Lease (9) provides for five 
months free rent at the beginning of the lease term (from 
April, 1992 through August, 1992), and that the Fine Arts 
Museum moved into the location on April 7, 1992. 

Mr. Gardner reports that beginning September 1, 1992, the 
City will be charged the monthly rental rate of $8,676 for the 
next seven months of the lease (through March 31, 1993), 
after which the City will be subject to a Consumer Price 
Index -based rental increase of not less than 3 percent, but no 
more than 6 percent, for the remaining three months of the 
lease (from April 1, 1993 through June 30, 1993), which would 
result in a maximum monthly rental payment of $9,197 
($8,676 x 6 percent increase) per month or $27,591 for the last 
three months. 

The maximum total rental payments for Lease (9) in fiscal 
year 1992-93 would be $88,323 ($8,676 x 7 months plus $9,197 x 
3 months). Therefore, the proposed resolution should be 
amended to authorize Lease (9)'s rental payments 
commencing September 1, 1992 and to state that the annual 
rental payments for Lease (9) in fiscal year 1992-93 will total a 
maximum amount of $88,323. 

7. Since the proposed resolution authorizes renewals and 
extensions of the above-named leases commencing July 1, 
1992, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively authorize lease renewals and extensions for 
Leases (1) through (9), commencing July 1, 1992. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to (1) reflect that the location 
of Lease (6) is 222 Leidesdorff Street; (2) reflect that the 
location of Lease (9) is 270 E. Grand Avenue in South San 
Francisco; (3) authorize Lease (9)'s rental payments 
commencing September 1, 1992; (4) state that the fiscal year 
1992-93 rental payments for Lease (9) total a maximum 
amount of $88,323; and (5) retroactively authorize the above 
named lease renewals and extensions. Approve the proposi id 
resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

1 17 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 11 - File 64-92-18 



Departments: 

Item: 

Location: 
Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 

No. of Sq. Ft and 
Cost Per Month: 

Annual Cost: 



Real Estate Department 
Department of Public Health (DPH), 
Emergency Medical Services Agency (EMSA) 

Resolution authorizing amendment to lease of real property 
for the Department of Public Health's Emergency Medical 
Services Agency at 1540 Market Street. 

1540 Market Street (addition of Suite 210 to existing lease) 

Office space for the Emergency Medical Services Agency of 
the Department of Public Health 

1540 Market Street Investment Company 



Addition of 442 square feet @ $1.083/sq. ft./month = $478.69 
rent/month. 



$5,744.28 



Percent Change from 



1991-92: 



Term of Lease: 



Utilities and 
Janitorial Services 
Provided By: 

Source of Funds: 



No change from per square foot rate charged according to the 
existing lease. 

No commencement date is provided. Proposed amendment to 
existing lease to run through balance of existing lease's term 
expiring October 31, 1995. 



Lessor provides all of these services. 
General Fund, 1992-93 Budget 



Comments: 1. The Emergency Medical Services Agency (EMSA) is 

responsible for overseeing all providers of emergency medical 
assistance in San Francisco. One of the Agency's functions 
is the certification and maintenance of records of all 
Paramedics, Emergency Medical Technicians and Mobile 
Intensive Care Nurses practicing within San Francisco. 

2. In June, 1991, the Finance Committee authorized the 
EMSA to request that the Real Estate Department negotiate a 
lease on behalf of the FMSA with the 1510 Market Street 
Investment Company for 2,356 square feet, of office space for 

BOARD OF SUI'KRVISPR.S 
BUDGET ANALYST 

118 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



$1,083 per square foot per month, or $2,552.33 per month at 
1540 Market Street (File 64-91-13). At that time, the EMSA 
had nine full-time and three part-time staff and anticipated 
that the EMSA might hire some additional staff, and it was 
estimated that the 1,657 usable square feet of space (excluding 
storage and conference areas) would provide an average of 
151 square feet per person for the 11 required desk spaces. 

3. Ms. Abbie Yant of the EMSA advises that the EMSA 
currently has a staff of nine full-time and three regular part- 
time staff and requires the extra 442 square feet for an area 
specifically dedicated for use as a reception and certification 
area. Ms. Yant advises that currently, approximately 200 
square feet is being used as a combined reception, 
certification and utility area (typing, copying, etc.), creating a 
lot of foot traffic and concerns about security. 

Mr. Mark Forrett of the EMSA reports that EMSA has 
received verbal approval for a Federal grant in the amount of 
$45,103, administered through the State Emergency Medical 
Services Authority for fiscal year 1992-93, and is reasonably 
certain that the funding is secure. The grant would fund the 
development of a computerized registry of pediatric patients 
treated by Emergency Medical services (911) ambulances, 
and would include the salary for an additional part-time 
staffperson to act as Project Coordinator (File 146-92-7.1). If 
the Federal funding is provided, this would mean that the 
EMSA might need 12 desk spaces. 

The EMSA proposes to convert this existing 200 square feet 
(presently used for a reception, certification and utility area) 
into a data processing/multi-purpose utility area, providing 
storage space for approximately 100,000 records and work 
space for office equipment, and housing an optical scanner to 
read ambulance records to collect data on the quality of 
ambulance care provided. 

The EMSA proposes to use the additional 442 square feet as a 
dedicated reception and certification area, with 
approximately 300 square feet of office space for certification 
professionals and approximately 142 square feet for the 
reception area, and a separate entrance for up to 500 Mobile 
Intensive Care Nurses, Paramedics and Emergency Medical 
Technicians seeking certification with the City each year. 
Ms. Yant advises that this arrangement will enable the 
EMSA staff who are not involved in certification to be more 
productive and secure, as these non-certification staff will be 
physically separated from the certification staff. Ms. Yant 
further advises that the Lessor will renovate the EMSA's 
office space at no charge to the City. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

119 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



4. Ms. Claudine Venegas of the Real Estate Department 
reports that the proposed rent reflects fair market values. 
Ms. Venegas advises that with the addition of Suite 210, the 
EMSA would have approximately 2,293 square feet of working 
area (a new total of 2,798 square feet less 305 square feet for 
the conference area, less 200 square feet for the storage/utility 
area), or 208 square feet per person, when factoring in 
approximately 11 required desk spaces. Ms. Venegas advises 
that the EMSA's office space, including the addition of 442 
square feet, slightly exceeds the acceptable range of between 
150 to 200 square feet of office space per person which the Real 
Estate Department uses as a standard. 

5. The proposed resolution does not specify a proposed date by 
which the proposed amendment to the EMSA's existing lease 
takes effect because the EMSA will not move into Suite 210 
until the Lessor has renovated Suite 210 at the Lessor's sole 
cost and expense as set forth in Exhibit B of the Amendment 
to the Lease. The Lessor will not proceed with renovations 
until the Finance Committee and the Mayor have authorized 
the proposed amendment to the existing EMSA lease and the 
amendment to the lease is executed. 

Ms. Yant advises that it will take approximately two to three 
weeks for the 1540 Market Street Investment Company to 
complete renovation of Suite 210. The proposed resolution 
also states that the monthly rental payment will be $478.69, 
subject to annual rent escalations of 5 percent, commencing 
July 1, 1993. Therefore, the proposed resolution should be 
amended to state that, upon satisfactory completion of certain 
required alterations by Lessor through June 30, 1993, a 
monthly rental payment of $478.69 will be due to the Lessor. 

6. Since the EMSA projects only an increase in one part-time 
staffperson, the addition of the proposed 442 square feet would 
provide more than the standard acceptable space according to 
Real Estate Department standards and the additional cost 
would be funded through the General Fund, the Budget 
Analyst believes approval of the proposed resolution is a 
policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to state that, upon 
satisfactory completion of certain required alterations by 
Lessor through June 30, 1993, monthly rental payments of 
$478.69 will be payable to the Lessor. Approval of the 
proposed resolution, as amended, is a policy mat tor for the 
Board of Supervisors. 



BOAKnOFSlTKRVlSPRS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

110 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 12 - File 47-92-1.1 

Departments: Department of Parking and Traffic 

Real Estate Department 

Item: Resolution confirming award of the auto detail area lease of 

the Golden Gateway Garage. 

Description: In March of 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved 

legislation (File 47-92-1) authorizing the Director of Property 
to call for bids for a lease of the auto detail area at the Golden 
Gateway Garage, located at 250 Clay Street. Accordingly, the 
Director of Property issued an Invitation for Bids to be 
received and opened by the Real Estate Department on May 
13, 1992. In response to the Invitation for Bids, the 
Department received requests for eight bid packages. The 
Department subsequently determined that all of the eight 
companies that requested bid packages met the minimum 
standards to bid on the auto detailing area. Of the eight 
qualified companies, only one, Five Star Parking, submitted a 
bid. Five Star Parking is the current operator of the Golden 
Gateway Garage. The Department awarded the lease to Five 
Star Parking based on the company's bid to pay the City 
$2,650 per month, subject to annual Consumer Price Index 
(CPI) increases, or 7 percent of the gross revenues, 
whichever is greater. Based on $2,650 per month rental, Five 
Star Parking would pay the City $31,800 annually. The auto 
detail area consists of a car wash area of 2,330 square feet 
plus an office/storage/restroom area of 529 square feet, for a 
total of 2,859 square feet. 

Comments: 1. The auto detail area at the Golden Gateway Garage was 

previously subleased to Rapid Shine Auto Detail by the former 
garage operator Golden Gate Parking Company. This 
sublease expired, upon the termination of Golden Gate 
Parking's lease with the City on September 30, 1991. Under 
the terms of this prior sublease, Rapid Shine paid Golden 
Gate Parking Company a monthly rental amount of $885 plus 
10 percent of gross revenues over $8,500. Of the $885 
minimum monthly rental, approximately 80.674 percent or 
$714 was paid by Golden Gate Parking Company to the City. 
The City was also entitled to 80.674 percent of the 10 percent 
gross revenues over $8,500. Based on $885 minimum 
monthly rent, Rapid Shine paid Golden Gate Parking $10,620 
annually, of which $8,568 was paid to the City. As noted 
above, under the proposed lease, Five Star Parking would pay 
the City a minimum of $31,800 annually or $l!.'?,L!;52 more than 
the $8,568 paid to the City annually under the Rapid Shine 
sublease. 



BOARD OF SCPKRVISQK S 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



2. Following the expiration of the sublease on September 30, 
1991, Rapid Shine continued to utilize the auto detail area, 
without benefit of a formal lease agreement, pending 
negotiations with the Real Estate Department to enter into a 
month-to-month lease agreement for the space. The 
Department of Parking and Traffic had agreed to permit 
Rapid Shine to negotiate a month-to-month lease directly 
with the City, until such time as a new permanent lease 
could be bid. However, the negotiations for a month-to-month 
lease with Rapid Shine were never finalized because the Real 
Estate Department and Rapid Shine could not reach a 
mutual agreement on financial issues regarding the 
monthly rental amount to be paid to the City and Rapid 
Shine's payment of back rent owed to the City. Details 
surrounding these financial issues were described 
extensively in a previous report to the Board of Supervisors 
(File 192-92-1). 

3. Ms. Claudine Venegas of the Real Estate Department 
reports that Rapid Shine has discontinued its auto detailing 
operations at the Golden Gateway Garage site. Ms. Venegas 
advises that the Real Estate Department sent a Notice of 
Abandonment to Rapid Shine on June 9, 1992. According to 
Ms. Venegas, Rapid Shine had until June 27, 1992 to respond 
to this notice after which the City had the legal right to take 
possession of the vacated space. Rapid Shine did not issue a 
response to the notice and the City has accordingly taken 
possession. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

122 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 13 -File 61-92-4 

Department Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Item: Resolution granting an extension of time for awarding Hetch 

Hetchy Contract No. HH-829, for the O'Shaughnessy Dam 
Septic System Rehabilitation Phase II. 

Description: The proposed resolution would extend the period of time for 

the PUC to award a Hetch Hetchy contract for the repair and 
rehabilitation of the O'Shaughnessy Dam Septic System, 
Phase II. Section 6.1 of the Administrative Code stipulates 
that award of contracts over $500,000 must be made within 30 
days after the receipt of bids unless the time for the award is 
extended by resolution of the Board of Supervisors. Section 
6.1 also provides for an additional 30-day period (for a total 
extension of 60 days) in order to develop, implement or 
improve a qualifying affirmative action nondiscrimination 
program, as required by Section 12.B of the Administrative 
Code. Since bids for contract No. HH-829 were received on 
February 11, 1992, the total 60-day period extended to April 11, 
1992. 

The PUC reports that the Department received qualified bids 
from the following six companies: 

MBE/WBE 





KW Emerson, Inc. 


Bid Amount 
$166,346 


Status 


1. 


None 


2. 


San Luis Construction 


167,374 


MBE* 


3. 


Gelco Services, Inc. 


178,842 


None 


4. 


Neth Construction, Inc. 


181,432 


None 


5. 


A. Answer, Inc. 


189,980 


MBE/WBE** 


6. 


Delta Excavating, Inc. 


309,350 


None 



* San Luis Construction is a certified MBE 
** A. Answer, Inc. is a certified MBE/WBE 

San Luis Construction was selected as the contractor for the 
proposed project. According to Mr. Robert Chun of the PUC 
Utilities Engineering Bureau, the additional time is required, 
due to the review of a bid protest received from A. Answer, 
Inc., in connection with San Luis Construction being selected 
as the contractor by the PUC for the proposed project. This hid 
protest contended that San Luis Construction did not meel 
the City's Affirmative Action requirements and that the 
company did not list a subcontractor for blasting in its hid 
Mr. Chun advises that listing a subcontractor to provide 
blasting in connection with the excavation work required for 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

123 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



this project, was not a requirement for qualifying as a 
responsible bidder. The Public Utilities General Counsel 
determined the protest to be without merit. The PUC Contract 
Compliance Officer determined that San Luis Construction, 
an MBE firm, meets the City's Affirmative Action 
requirements. San Luis Construction has stated that it 
intends to either perform the required excavation work 
connected with the repair and rehabilitation of the 
O'Shaughnessy Dam Septic System without blasting or to add 
a certified blaster to its workforce, if blasting is needed. 

1. Mr. Chun advises that the PUC awarded the subject 
contract to San Luis Construction on May 26, 1992. 
Therefore, the actual period of time that elapsed from the 
date the bids were received (February 11, 1992), to the award 
of the contract, was 105 days. 

2. Since the PUC has already awarded the subject contract to 
San Luis Construction, the proposed legislation should be 
amended to retroactively grant an extension of time for the 
PUC to award the Hetch Hetchy Contract No. HH-829. 

Amend the proposed legislation to retroactively grant an 
extension of time for the PUC to award the subject contract 
and approve the legislation as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



124 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item 14 - File 64-92-9 



Department: 

Item: 

Location: 

Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 

No. of Sq. Ft and 
Cost per Month: 

Annual Cost: 

% Increase 
Over 1989-90: 

Utilities and Janitor 
Services Provided by 
Lessor: 

Term of Lease: 

Right of Renewal: 

Source of Funds: 



Real Estate 

Department of Parking and Traffic 

Resolution authorizing the extension of an existing lease at 
1975-99 Bryant Street for the Traffic Engineering Division of 
the Department of Parking and Traffic. 

1975-99 Bryant Street 

Traffic Sign Shop 

Jack and La Vonne Keeney 

21,162 square feet at $0,425 per square foot or $9,001 per 
month. 

$108,012 
3.5 percent 

No 



Comments: 



July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Yes 

The annual proposed rent of $108,012 would be funded 
through the Road Fund, and the funds are subject to being 
approved in the Annual Appropriation Ordinance for Fiscal 
Year 1992-93. 

According to Mr. Steve Legnitto of the Real Estate 
Department, the proposed rental amount of $0,425 per square 
foot is in accordance with the fair market value of the 
property. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 15 - File 64-92-10 

Department: Department of Public Works 

Real Estate Department 

Item: Resolution authorizing extension of an existing lease of 

vacant land at Army and Evans Streets for the Department of 
Public Works, for storage of equipment and recycled road 
materials. 

Location: Army and Evans Streets, Lot Al Assessor's Block 4343. 

Purpose of Lease: Storage space for equipment and recycled road materials. 



Lessor. 

No.ofSq.Ftand 
Cost per Month: 



Annual Cost: 

% Increase 
Over 1991-92: 



Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

170,000 square feet at $0,135 per square foot per month, for a 
total monthly rent $23,000. 

$276,000 

No increase over the 1991-92 rent of $23,000 per month. 



Utilities and Janitor 
Services Provided by 
Lessor: None 

Term of Lease: On a month to month basis for up to one year, July 1, 1992 

through June 30, 1993 



Right of Renewal: N o 



Source of Funds: 



Comments: 



The annual proposed rent of $276,000 would be funded 
through a combination of Road Fund monies and Sewer 
Service charges revenue. Such funds are subject to being 
approved in the Annual Appropriation Ordinance for Fiscal 
Year 1992-93. 

1. According to Mr. Steve Legnitto of the Real Estate 
Department, the proposed rent represents the fair market 
value. 

2. Mr. Legnitto further states that, the City is in the 
process of purchasing this property and expects to conclude 
the purchase hy the end of the 92-93 fiscal year. Trior to the 
1991-92 fiscal year, the rent for this piece of property was 
suhstantially below market rates. When the City renewed the 
lease in the 1991-92 fiscal year, the lessor raised the rent to its 

HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

126 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



fair market level. In light of the increase in rent, the 
Department of Real Estate and the Department of Public 
Works determined that it would be more cost effective to 
purchase the property than to continue to rent it. The 
Department of Real Estate has subsequently entered into 
negotiations with the lessor for the purchase of the property. 
Funding for the purchase, subject to Board of Supervisors 
approval, is proposed to be through the issuance of 
Certificates of Participation. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

127 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item 16 -File 64-92-11 



Department: 
Item: 

Location: 
Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 



Controller 

Resolution authorizing the extension of an existing real 
property lease for the Controller at 160 South Van Ness 
Avenue. 

160 South Van Ness Avenue 

Office space for the Controller's Payroll and Internal 
Audits Division. 

Trudy Cohn 



No. of Sq. Ft 

and Cost Per Month: 15,000 sq. ft. @ $0.73/sq. ftVmonth, or $10,968 per month 



Annual Cost: 

% Increase Over 
1991-92: 



$131,616 



3.7 percent 



Utilities and Janitor 

Services: Paid by the Controller, at a total cost of approximately 

$26,000 per year (see Comment No. 4). 



Term of Lease: 
Right of Renewal: 
Source of Funds: 
Comments: 



July 1, 1992 to June 30, 1993 

None (see Comment No. 1) 

General Fund (included in the proposed 1992-93 budget) 

1. Mr. Steve Legnitto of the Real Estate Department reports 
that the City's existing lease for the premises, which 
expired June 30, 1992, provides a right of renewal for one 
year. The proposed lease extension would result from the 
exercise of the City's option to renew the lease for one year. 
If the lease extension is approved, the lease would expire 
June 30, 1993, and the lease for the premises would have to 
be renegotiated in order for it to continue after June 30, 
1993, according to Mr. Legnitto. The proposed lease 
extension includes no escalation provisions and no further 
right of renewal. 

2. The monthly rent of $10,968 for 1992-93 represents a 3.7 
percent increase over the monthly rent of $10,575 in 1991-92. 
The rent increase is determined according to the provisions 
of the existing lease. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

128 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



3. Mr. Legnitto indicates that the monthly rent per square 
foot of $0.73 ($10,968 per month for 15,000 square feet), 
excluding janitorial services and utilities, represents fair 
market value for the premises. 

4. Ms. Howie Bogard of the Controller's Office indicates 
that the cost of janitorial services and utilities for the 
premises in 1991-92 will be approximately $11,000 for 
janitorial services ($917 per month), $13,000 for Light, Heat, 
and Power ($1,083 per month), and $2,000 for water service 
($167 per month). The total cost of these services will be 
approximately $26,000 per year, or $2,167 per month, for a 
monthly cost per square foot of approximately $0.14. Ms. 
Bogard is not aware of any expected increases in these costs 
at the present time. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

129 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 17 - File 64-92-12 



Departments: Real Estate Department 

Department of Public Works 

Item: Resolution authorizing extension of sublease of real property 

for the Department of Public Works at 1170 Market Street, 7th 
Floor. 

Location: 1170 Market Street (entire 7th Floor) 

Purpose of Lease: Office space for Personnel and Computer Services Division. 

Sublessor: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) 

No.ofSq.Ftand 

Cost Per Month: 4,966 square feet @ $1.16/sq. ft7month = $5,780.75 rent/month 



Annual Cost: 



$69,369 



Percent Change from 
1991-92: None. 



Term of Lease: 



July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 



Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

ProvidedBv: PG&E pays for all utilities and janitorial services. 



Source of Funds: 



Comments: 



DPW's Departmental Overhead and Administrative Funds 
requested in the DPW's 1992-93 budget (see Comment #2 
below). 

1. Mr. Phil Aissen of the Real Estate Department reports that 
the proposed rent reflects fair market values. 

2. Mr. Ron Small of the DPW reports that the DPW's 
Departmental Overhead and Administrative Fund, whicb 
would fund the proposed lease, is funded through a variety of 
sources. Mr. Small indicates that the funding sources 
include the Gas Tax, Road Funds, Bond Funds, the General 
Fund, and Capital Improvement Funds. Mr. Small also 
indicates that U'ss than 10 percent comes from the General 
Fund. 

3. Since the above-mentioned lease extension commences 
July 1, 1992, the proposed resolution should he amended to 
retroactively authorize the lease extension. 

BOARD OF SUPKKV1SOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

130 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to retroactively authorize the 
lease extension. Approve the proposed resolution, as 
amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

131 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item 18 



File 64-92-13 



Departments: Real Estate Department 

Department of Social Services (DSS) 

Item: Resolution authorizing extensions of three certain leases of 

real property for the Department of Social Services (see 
Locations (1) through (3) below). 



(1) Location: Lot at South Van Ness Avenue and 13th Street 

Purpose of Lease: Off-street parking for the Department of Social Services 

Lessor: State of California 

No.ofSq.Ftand 

Cost Per Month: 34,420 square feet @ $.046/sq. ftVmonth = $1,600 rent/month 



Annual Cost: 



$19,200 



Percent Change from 

1991-92: None. 

Term of Lease: The lease shall be extended on a month-to-month basis for up 
to one year, from July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. 

Right of Renewal: 11 one-year options 

Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By. Not applicable. 

Source of Funds: 35% City General Fund; 65% State and Federal funds 

(2) Location: Lot at Valencia and Stevenson Streets 

Purpose of Lease: Off-street parking for the Department of Social Services 

Lessor: State of California 

No.ofSq.Ftand 

Cost Per Month: 28,170 square feet @ $.067/sq. R./month = $1,883 rent /month 



Annual Cost: 



$22,596 



BOARD OF SI TPKRVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

132 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Percent Increase Over 
1991-92: None. 

Term of Lease: July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Right of Renewal: Eight one-year options 

Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: Not applicable. 

Source of Funds: 35% City General Fund; 65% State and Federal funds 



(3) Location: 



1440 Harrison Street (entire building) 



Purpose of Lease: Office space for Department of Social Services, General 
Assistance Program (July 1, 1992 through August 31, 1992); 
Building renovation (approximately September 1, 1992 
through October 31, 1992); 

Office space for DSS, Child Welfare Division (approximately 
November, 1992 through June 30, 1993). 



Lesson 

No.ofSq.Ftand 
Cost Per Month: 

Annual Cost: 



Eden & Eden 

52,200 square feet @ $1.49/sq. ft./month = $77,670 rent/month 
$932,040 



Percent Change from 

1991-92: None. 

Term of Lease: July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Right of Renewal: Three ten-year options and one five-year option 

Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: The City pays for all utilities and services. 

Source of Funds: 35% City General Fund; 65% State and Federal funds 



*********** 



Comments: 1. Mr. Steve Legnitto of the Real Estate Department reports 

that the proposed rents reflect fair market values. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

133 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



2. Mr. Legnitto advises that the leases with the State of 
California for parking lots at Valencia and Stevenson Streets 
as well as at South Van Ness Avenue and 13th Street should 
be extended on a month-to-month basis as a result of the 
proposed State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 
retrofit of Highway 101, which is directly on top of the two 
parking lots. 

In his most recent conversation with Caltrans, Mr. Legnitto 
was told that Caltrans plans to do the retrofit work sometime 
after July 1, 1992, but could not provide a firm date at this 
time. To ensure that the City has the necessary flexibility in 
its leases in case the retrofit work should interfere with the 
usage of the parking lots, the Real Estate Department 
recommends that both of the above-mentioned DSS parking 
lot leases be extended on a month-to-month basis for up to one 
year, from July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. 

Since the proposed resolution states that the lot at 13th Street 
and South Van Ness Avenue is to be leased on a month-to- 
month basis and the lot at Valencia and Stevenson Streets is 
to be leased on an annual basis, the proposed resolution 
should be amended to reflect that the lease for the lot at 
Valencia and Stevenson Streets is also being extended on a 
month-to-month basis. 

3. Mr. Legnitto advises that there is no increase in the rents 
for the parking lots, as compared to the rents in fiscal year 
1991-92, because Caltrans did not request a rental increase, 
in part because of the inconvenience to be caused by the 
proposed retrofitting of Highway 101. 

4. The total amount of funds required for the three leases is a 
maximum of $973,836. The funding availability is subject to 
approval in the fiscal year 1992-93 budget. 

5. Rents for the Department of Social Services leases are paid 
based on a proportional basis. Proportions paid by the City's 
General Fund versus the State and Federal governments are 
calculated using a formula based on the number of hours 
which social workers expend on various projects. According 
to Ms. Judy Schutzman of DSS, the City will be reimbursed by 
the State and Federal governments for 65 percent of the cost of 
renting the parking lots as well as the cost of renting the DSS 
offices at 1440 Harrison Street. Ms. Schutzman advises that 
it is her understanding that reimbursement of DSS 
administrative costs by the Federal and State governments, 
winch pays for 65 percent of the rental payments in this 
proposed resolution, is not in any jeopardy, as a result of the 
State budget crisis. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

134 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Ms. Schutzman advises that the General Assistance 
Program is currently located at 1440 Harrison Street, but that 
the building will be vacated on approximately August 31, 
1992. At that time, the Department of Public Works will 
either make the renovations or implement a competitive 
bidding process for an outside contractor to make the 
necessary renovations at 1440 Harrison Street. Ms. 
Schutzman reports that the City will continue to pay rent at 
1440 Harrison Street while the building remains vacant 
during the renovation work, between approximately 
September 1, 1992 through October 31, 1992, since DSS, rather 
than the Lessor, chose to make the renovations. 

Ms. Schutzman reports that by approximately August 31, 
1992, the major renovation work at 1235 Mission Street (the 
Delta Dental Building) will be completed and the General 
Assistance Program staff will move from 1440 Harrison 
Street to 1235 Mission Street. Once the renovations are 
completed, DSS plans to consolidate the Child Welfare 
Division (now located at 1625 Van Ness Avenue and 170 Otis 
Street) at 1440 Harrison Street by approximately the 
beginning of November, 1992. 

Mr. Legnitto reports that there is still some uncertainty about 
the completion date of the renovations at 1235 Mission Street, 
so the Real Estate Department is recommending the 
extension of the lease for 1625 Van Ness Avenue on a month- 
to-month basis (Item 5 - File 64-92-19 of this report) to ensure 
that none of the DSS staff will be displaced in the event that 
there are any delays. 

6. DSS leases 91 parking spaces at the South Van Ness 
Avenue and 13th Street lot, while leasing 54 spaces at the 
Valencia and Stevenson Streets lot. Ms. Schutzman advises 
that presently, DSS employees are not charged a fee for the 
use of the parking spaces. 

7. Since the above-mentioned lease extensions commence 
July 1, 1992, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively authorize these lease extensions. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to extend the lease for the 
parking lot at Valencia and Stevenson Streets on a month-to- 
month basis for up to one year, from July 1, 1992 through 
June 30, 1993, and to retroactively authorize the lease 
extensions. Approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

135 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Item 19 - File 64-92-14 



Departments: Real Estate Department for various departments as detailed 

below 

Item: Resolution authorizing extensions of eight certain leases of 

real property for various City departments (see Locations (1) 
through (8) below). 

(1) Department Public Library 

Location: 2434 San Bruno Avenue 

Purpose of Lease: Portola Branch Library. 

Lessor: Adeline Gill, et al. 

No.ofSq.Ftand 

Cost Per Month: 1,735 square feet @ $.63/sq. ft./month = $1,093.68 rent/month 

Annual Cost: $13,124.16 

Percent Change from 

1991-92: 5 percent increase 

Term of Lease: July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: The City pays for all utilities and services. 

Source of Funds: General Fund - 1992-93 Library Budget 

(2) Department: Public Library 
Location: 653 Chenery Street 
Purpose of Lease: Glen Park Branch Library 
Lessor: Mr. and Mrs. Wilheim A. Tietz 

No. of Sq. Ft and 

Cost Per Month: 1,500 square feet @ $.86/sq. ft./month = $1,289.93 rent, /month 

Annual Cost: $15,479.16 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

136 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Percent Increase Over 
1991-92: 5 percent 

Term of Lease: July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: The City pays for all utilities and services. 

Source of Funds: General Fund - 1992-93 Library Budget 

(3) Department: Public Library 

Location: 111 Broad Street 

Purpose of Lease: Oceanview Branch Library. 

Lessor: Stratigos Real Properties, Inc. 

No. of Sq. Ft and 

Cost Per Month: 1,370 square feet @ $.473/sq. ft7month = $648.27 rent/month 

Annual Cost: $7,779.24 

Percent Change from 

1991-92: 5 percent increase 

Term of Lease: July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: The City pays for all utilities and services. 

Source of Funds: General Fund - 1992-93 Library Budget 

(4) Department: Public Library 
Location: 45 Leland Avenue 

Purpose of Lease: Visitacion Valley Branch Library. 

Lessor: Kenneth Chung, et al. 

No. of Sq. Ft and 

Cost Per Month: 2,300 square feet @ $.718/sq. ft/month = $1,650.44 rent/month 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

137 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Total Cost 



Not to exceed $19,805.28 (see term of lease below) 



Percent Change from 

1991-92: 5 percent increase 

Term of Lease: This space is to be leased on a month-to-month basis, 

commencing July 1, 1992, at a monthly rental rate of 
$1,650.44 per month, for a period not to exceed 12 months. 

Utilities and 

Janitorial Services 

Provided By: The City pays for all utilities and services. 

Source of Funds: General Fund - 1992-93 Library Budget 

(5) Department: Department of Agriculture 

Location: 501 Army Street 

Purpose of Lease: Administrative office space. 

Lessor: San Francisco Port Commission 

No.ofSq.Ftand 

Cost Per Month: 2,275 square feet @ $.753/sq. ft./month = $1,712.68 rent/month 



Annual Cost: 



$20,552.16 



Percent Change from 

1991-92: 5 percent increase 



Term of Lease: 

Utilities and 
Janitorial Services 
Provided By: 



July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 



The San Francisco Port Commission pays for heat, electrical 
and water services. 



Source of Funds: General Fund - 1992-93 Agriculture Budget 






(6) Department: Recreation and Park Department 

Location: 133 Golden Gate Avenue 

Purpose of I .ease: Tenderloin Children's Playground and Community Center. 

ROARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

138 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Lessor: St. Boniface Neighborhood Center, Inc. 

No. of Sq. Ft and 

Cost Per Month: 8,780 square feet @ $.276/sq. ft./month = $2,419 rent/month 

Total Cost Not to exceed $29,028 (see term of lease below) 

Percent Change from 
1991-92: None. 

Term of Lease: This space is to be leased on a month-to-month basis, 

commencing July 1, 1992, at a monthly rental rate of $2,419 
per month, for a period not to exceed 12 months. 

Utilities and 
Janitorial Services 

Provided By: St. Boniface Neighborhood Center, Inc. pays for all utilities 

and services. 

Source of Funds: General Fund - 1992-93 Recreation and Park Department 

(7) Departments: Human Rights Commission (HRC) and Commission on the 
Status of Women (CSOW) 

Location: 1170 Market Street (entire 5th and 6th Floors) 

Purpose of Lease: Office space for the Human Rights Commission and the 
Commission on the Status of Women. 

Sublessor: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 

No.ofSq.Ftand 

Cost Per Month: 9,400 square feet @ $1.207/sq. ft./month = $11,342 rent/month 

Total Cost Not to exceed $34,026 (see term of lease below) 

Percent Change from 

1991-92: 4 percent change (for period from July 1, 1991 through 

December, 1991); 

percent change (for period from January 1, 1992 through 

June 30, 1992) 

Term of Lease: This space is to be leased on a month-to-month basis for a 

maximum period of 90 days, commencing July 1, 1992, at a 
monthly rental rate of $11,342 per month. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

139 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Utilities and 
Janitorial Services 
Provided By: 

Source of Funds: 



Pacific Gas & Electric Company pays for all utilities. 

General Fund monies requested in the Human Rights 
Commission and Commission on the Status of Women 
budgets for 1992-93. 



(8) Department 
Location: 



Department of Public Health 
1540 Market Street, Suite 260 



Purpose of Lease: Office space for the Department of Public Health's AB 75 
Project. 



Lessor: 

No.ofSq.Ftand 
Cost Per Month: 

Total Cost 



1540 Market Street Investment Company 

1,296 square feet @ $1.083/sq. ft./month = $1,404 rent/month 
Not to exceed $8,424 (see term of lease below). 



Percent Change from 
1991-92: None. 



Term of Lease: 



Utilities and 
Janitorial Services 
Provided By: 



Source of Funds: 
Comments: 



This space is to be leased for the period July 1, 1992 through 
December 31, 1992 at a rental rate of $1,404 per month (a 
period of 6 months). 



1540 Market Street Investment Company pays for all utilities 
and services. 

General Fund, 1992-93 Budget 

1. Ms. Claudine Venegas of the Real Estate Department 
reports that the proposed rents reflect fair market values. 

2. Ms. Venegas advises that Lease (4) is a month-to-month 
lease because the restroom at the present location of the 
Visitacion Valley Branch Library is not handicapped 
accessible and the Real Estate Department is in the process of 
negotiating with the Lessor to make the necessary 
renovations. Ms. Venegas reports that the Lessor will be 
reviewing plans drafted by the Real Estate Department 
within the next two weeks, at. which time the Lessor will 



ttOAKPOFSUrKHVlSOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

UO 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



determine whether or not he can make the necessary 
renovations to make the restroom handicapped accessible. 

The Real Estate Department advises that the month-to-month 
lease will give the Public Library the flexibility the Library 
needs as a result of the uncertainty about the Lessor's 
decision about the renovations, and that if the Lessor is 
unable to make the restroom at 45 Leland Avenue 
handicapped accessible, the Real Estate Department will 
work with the Public Library to find an alternative site. 

3. Ms. Venegas advises that Lease (6) is a month-to-month 
lease because the Recreation Center now located at 133 
Golden Gate Avenue is planning to relocate sometime in 
fiscal year 1992-93. Mr. Tim Lillyquist of the Recreation and 
Park Department advises that a new recreation center 
focusing primarily on children is being built at 570 Ellis 
Street and should be completed within one year, at which 
time the lease at 133 Golden Gate Avenue will be 
discontinued. 

4. Since the proposed resolution erroneously lists one of the 
tenants in Lease (7) as the Commission on the State of 
Women, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
correct the tenant's name to the Commission on the Status of 
Women. 

Ms. Venegas advises that Lease (7) is a month-to-month lease 
for up to 90 days because the Human Rights Commission and 
the Commission on the Status of Women plan to relocate 
their offices to 25 Van Ness Avenue within 90 days, or by 
October 1, 1992, once the required renovations are completed. 

5. Ms. Venegas advises that the Real Estate Department 
erroneously included Lease (8) for the AB 75 office space 
located at 1540 Market Street, Suite 260, in the proposed 
resolution. Ms. Venegas reports that the resolution approved 
by the Finance Committee in January, 1991 (File 64-90-48) 
authorized the Real Estate Department to negotiate an office 
lease from January 15, 1991 through December 31, 1991, plus 
a one-year extension option, which means the lease would 
not expire until December 31, 1992. Therefore, the proposed 
resolution should be amended to delete Lease (8) from the 
proposed resolution. 

6. Since the above-named lease extensions commence on 
July 1, 1992, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively authorize these lease extensions. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

141 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Recommendation; Amend the proposed resolution to (1) retroactively authorize 
the lease extensions, (2) state that one of the tenants in Lease 
(7) is the Commission on the Status of Women, and (3) delete 
Lease (8) from the proposed resolution. Approve the proposed 
resolution, as amended. 



HOARD OF SUPKUVISC )KS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item 20 -File 65-92-9 
Department 
Proposed Action: 



Description: 



Port of San Francisco 

Ordinance approving Second Amendment to a lease 
between Mission Creek Harbor Association, Inc., 
(MCHA) and the City and County operating by and 
through the San Francisco Port Commission. 

In 1976, the Port obtained Permit No. 7-76 from the Bay 
Conservation Development Commission (BCDC), which 
authorized the reconstruction and use of a marina for 20 
houseboats and 35 recreational boats in the China Basin 
Channel. As a condition of Permit No. 7-76, the Port was 
required to construct and maintain certain public access 
improvements along the shoreline. In March of 1989, the 
Port entered into a 30 year lease with the Mission Creek 
Harbor Association for docks, berth space and property 
located between Fifth and Sixth Streets on the South side 
of the China Basin Channel. As stipulated in the lease 
agreement, responsibility for completing and 
maintaining the public access improvements was 
transferred from the Port to the MCHA. In December of 
1989, the lease was amended to provide, among other 
things, details of the tenant's obligation to install certain 
improvements on the premises, including public 
improvements, and provisions for dealing with the 
possibility that it may be necessary to temporarily 
disturb the tenancy in order that environmental cleanup 
of the channel be accomplished. 

As reported by the Port, the required improvements have 
not been completed by the MCHA, as stipulated in the 
Port's lease agreement with the MCHA. This inaction 
on completing the public improvements has resulted in 
BCDC issuing a Cease and Desist Order, specifying that 
Phase I of the work on the public access improvements 
be completed by February 15, 1993, and that all of the 
required public access improvements be completed by 
February of 1997. As further reported by the Port, in 
order to avoid the delay, expense, and uncertainty of 
results that would be associated with an enforcement 
action to require the MCHA to complete and maintain 
the public improvements, the BCDC, the MCHA, and the 
Port pursued a negotiated resolution of the issue which 
resulted in a Stipulated Settlement and Cease and Desist 
Order (Stipulated Settlement). That. Stipulated 
Settlement, which would become effective only if this 
Second Amendment to the MCHA Lease is finally 
approved, provides that the Port, as CO permit tic on 

r.OAKnOFSITPKKVlSPRS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

143 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Permit 7-76, would guarantee the completion of the 
required public access improvements if MCHA failed to 
perform as scheduled. The Stipulated Settlement 
provides for five phases of construction spread over a 
five-year period, with construction costs averaging 
approximately $20,000 per phase. The Stipulated 
Settlement also provides that if the Port incurs any costs 
as a result of the Port's obligation to perform public 
access improvements as the guarantor of MCHA's 
obligation under the BCDC Stipulated Settlement and 
Cease and Desist Order, then MCHA would repay the 
Port for the actual cost, plus 25 percent for overhead, at 
12 percent annual interest in equal payments of 
principal and interest over a five-year period, beginning 
on the date that the Port incurs the obligation to perform. 

The proposed Second Amendment of the Lease 
incorporates relevant provisions of the Stipulated 
Settlement and incorporates other provisions made 
necessary by the further development and adoption of the 
Mission Bay Plan since 1989, as follows: 

(1) Revises language in the First Amendment of the 
Lease regarding the possible relocation of recreational 
boats if environmental clean-up is required in the 
Channel. The First Amendment includes a Port 
obligation to "equitably abate" MCHA's rent if the boats 
are relocated; the Second Amendment defines and limits 
the "equitable abatement" obligation to an amount equal 
to the percentage of revenue-producing linear feet of 
berthing space being vacated. Since approximately 55 
percent of MCHA's operating revenues are derived from 
recreational boat berth rentals, the Second Amendment 
specifies circumstances under which the Port will defer 
MCHA's obligations to the Port during the period of any 
such relocation, in order that MCHA may avoid 
insolvency in the event such relocation extends for a 
period of several months. Obligations of the MCHA 
which may be deferred, for the relocation period only, 
include (a) repayments to the Port, if any, due because 
the Port was required to perform public access 
improvements as discussed above; (b) performance of 
scheduled Required Improvements to the Premises, 
excepting improvements required for health and safety 
reasons; and (c) payment of amount of rent due after 
abatement for the relocated boats, with repayment of any 
deferred amount due over the remaining term of the 
lease at 12 percent annual interest. 



BOARD OF SI JPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

144 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

(2) Revises language in the First Amendment of the 
Lease relating to the Port's obligations to cause any 
environmental clean-up to be "minimally inconvenient" 
by adding "to the extent reasonably feasible," and to 
revise the language providing that the clean-up will be 
accomplished "in the most expedient manner possible" 
to add that the Port should not have to incur substantial 
additional cost to accomplish that result. In addition, the 
amendments provide that the Port will consult with 
MCHA prior to submitting plans to the State regulatory 
bodies, but that once the plans are approved, MCHA 
agrees that the plans satisfy the Port's obligations as to 
manner, timeliness and type of environmental clean-up. 

(3) Revises language in the First Amendment of the 
Lease relating to MCHA's clean-up obligations with 
respect to hazardous materials that MCHA is 
responsible for, to identify additional pre-existing 
conditions, and to require MCHA to cooperate with other 
clean-up efforts. 

(4) Inserts other minor clarifications in the language 
principally relating to the public access improvement 
obligations in relation to the Mission Bay project. 

Comments: 1. The MCHA has been operating the mixed-use harbor 

for houseboats and recreational vessels at Mission Creek 
in excess of 20 years. In 1977, the Port Commission 
approved a lease with MCHA. However, that lease was 
never executed. As previously stated, the existing lease 
agreement between the Port and the MCHA was 
executed in March of 1989 and amended in December of 
1989. 

2. Under the terms of the existing lease agreement, the 
MCHA is leasing 192,400 square feet of space for 
$3,105.48 per month, or $37,265.76 on an annual basis. 
The lease term is for 30 years, commending in February 
of 1989 and provides for annual consumer price index 
(CPI) increases. According to Ms. Veronica Sanchez of 
the Port, the MCHA is current on its rental payments. 

3. Ms. Noreen Ambrose of the City Attorney's Office 
reports that the proposed Second Amendment makes 
performance by MCHA to complete the public 
improvements more likely in that the enforcement 
provisions of the Cease and Desist Order would not be 
subject to litigation and that the MCHA would be 
required to reimburse the Port for its actual public 
access improvement costs plus a 25 percent overhead 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

145 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

cost and a 12 percent interest cost. The Port's 
construction costs for each of the five one-year 
construction phases would be approximately $20,000, or 
a total of approximately $100,000. 

4. Ms. Ambrose reports that the MCHA recently 
expended approximately $300,000 to correct safety 
problems related to the Mission Creek docks, but that 
those improvements are separate from the required 
public access improvements. 

5. Although the enforcement provisions of the proposed 
Second Amendment to the existing lease between the 
Port and the MCHA contain improvements over the 
existing lease provisions, as they concern requiring 
MCHA to complete the public access improvements, 
those lease provisions, in our opinion, should be further 
strengthened, such as by requiring a deposit of funds for 
construction or a performance bond. 

Recommendation; Continue the proposed legislation pending the Port 

submitting a revised proposed Second Amendment to the 
Finance Committee that includes the provision of a 
performance bond by the MCHA to perform the required 
public access improvement work. 



BOARD OF ST JPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

146 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Item 21 - File 97-92-39 
Item: 



Description: 



Comments: 



Ordinance amending Chapter 2, Article VIII, San 
Francisco Administrative Code (Temporary Use or 
Occupancy of Public Streets), by amending Section 2.70-1 
thereof, to increase the application fee for temporary use 
or occupancy of public streets from $40 to $80 dollars. 

Chapter 2, Article VIII of the San Francisco 
Administrative Code outlines procedures for the closure of 
streets for public events sponsored by private groups or 
community organizations. Article VIII outlines application 
procedures and regulations for street closures of a general 
nature, street fairs, athletic events, activities of the San 
Francisco Unified School District, and for the use of 
United Nations Plaza. 

On July 1, 1992 the Finance Committee recommended 
approval of a proposed ordinance amending Section 2.70-6 
of Article VIII, which would raise the fee for filing an 
Application for Temporary Use of Street for Street Fair 
from $40 to $80 (File 97-92-39). 

The proposed ordinance now under consideration would 
amend Section 2.70-1 of Article VIII, to raise the 
application fee for street closures of a general nature and 
for athletic events. The proposed ordinance would 
provide for an increase of $40 in the application fee, from 
$40 to $80. 

The proposed ordinance would not amend other types of 
fees required under Article VIII, including reimbursement 
for the services of City Departments, but would only 
amend the fee for filing the street closure application, as 
provided in Section 2.70-1. 

1. The Budget Analyst has previously reported (File No. 
97-92-39), based on information provided by the 
Department of Parking and Traffic, that there were 172 
public events in 1991-92 for which street closure 
applications were filed. 

The 172 applications included applications filed 
concerning street closures of a general nature, street 
fairs, and athletic events. 

The revenue estimates contained in the Budget Analyst's 
report of July 1, 1992 assumed, based on information 
provided by the Department of Parking and Traffic, that 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

1/.7 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



fees for approximately 172 street closure applications 
would increase if the earlier proposed ordinance, 
amending application fees for street fairs under Section 
2.70-6, were approved. In fact, the revenue estimates also 
depend upon enactment of the newly proposed ordinance, 
which would implement an $80 application fee under 
Section 2.70-1, for applications of a general nature and for 
athletic events. 

2. The revenue derived from 172 street closures in 1991- 
92, at $40 per application, was $6,880. In contrast, Mr. 
Tim Johnson of the Department of Parking and Traffic 
indicates that DPT's actual costs for processing the 
applications, consisting primarily of personnel costs, is 
estimated to have been $13,722 in 1991-92. Based on 172 
events, a $40 increase in all street closure application fees 
to $80 would generate $13,760, and would offset the 
Department's actual costs to process street closure 
applications, according to Mr. Johnson. The increase in 
revenue resulting from the $40 increase in the application 
fees would be $6,880 per year, if the higher application 
fees were imposed for the entire fiscal year. 

However, the Budget Analyst notes that since two 
readings of the proposed ordinance are required prior to 
approval by the Board of Supervisors, and because the 
proposed ordinance would not take effect until 30 days 
after the date it is signed by the Mayor, it is doubtful that 
the proposed higher fees could take effect until 
approximately September 1, 1992, after two months of the 
fiscal year had passed. Based on an average of 14.33 
applications per month, and a $40 fee for 2 months and an 
$80 fee for ten months, the estimated total revenue for 
street closure application fees in 1992 if the proposed 
ordinance is approved would be $12,610. 

3. As noted, if street closure application fees were raised 
from $40 to $80 and 172 applications are filed in 1992-93, 
revenues in 1992-93 would be $12,610, or $1,112 less than 
the Department's 1991-92 cost to process the applications, 
as reported by Mr. Johnson. The Budget Analyst notes 
that, with salary standardization for clerk positions at 
DPT of approximately 9.5 percent, the Department's 
processing costs would increase from $13,722 in 1991-92 
to approximately $15,026 in 1992-93. However, the 
proposed increase in the application fee would generate 
$12,610, or $2,416 less than DPT's projected costs of 
$15,026 in 1992-93. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

U8 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

4. The Department of Parking and Traffic's proposed 
1992-93 budget includes projected revenue in the amount 
of $13,200 from the street closure application fee, or $590 
more than the revised estimates of $12,610. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance in order to recover the 

Department's costs of providing these services. 



/ 
Harvey M. Rose 



' /<' '-?■ '/' 



Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

1 /jO 



> 5 



CITY AND COUNTY 




<Pu6[ic Library, 'Documents (Dept 



OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 

July 8, 1992 

TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst ^-<? 

SUBJECT: Condominium Conversion and Gaming Table Revenue Proposals 



The Budget Analyst has prepared the enclosed reports on recent proposals 
concerning condominium conversions and gaming tables in San Francisco. 



cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 




Harvey M. Rose 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

JUL 1 1992 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



\ 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Condominium Conversions 



Note: On July 8, 1992, Ms. Jean Mariani, the Mayor's Budget Director, 

informed the Budget Analyst that the proposed condominium 
conversion ordinance is not intended to be implemented as a revenue 
measure for the fiscal year 1992-93 budget. The proposed ordinance 
was prepared by a private attorney and is presently being reviewed by 
the City Attorney's office. 



Item: Ordinance amending Part II, Chapter XIII of the San Francisco 

Municipal Code (Subdivision Code) by adding Article 11, consisting of 
Sections 1400 through 1410, and by amending Section 1332 to permit 
the conversion of residential rental property to condominium or other 
ownership subject to certain requirements. 



Description: 



The proposed ordinance would create a new mechanism to permit the 
conversion of residential rental property to condominiums, co mmu nity 
apartments, stock cooperatives, cooperative associations, limited stock 
cooperatives, or other types of home ownership authorized under State 
law. 

A minimum of 1,000 and a maximum of 1,100 applications for home 
ownership conversion would be approved by the Director of Public 
Works pursuant to the proposed legislation. The properties would be 
selected by a lottery to be held 45 days after the legislation, if approved 
by the Board of Supervisors, is signed by the Mayor. The proposed 
ordinance contains certain provisions for tenants' participation which 
must be satisfied before final approval for the conversion would be 
granted. These requirements are outlined as part of the application 
and review process, and are discussed in detail below. 

The proposed ordinance states that the subdivider of any building 
being converted for home ownership under Article 11 would pay 5 
percent of the sale price of each unit, but not less than $10,000 per 
unit, to the City's General Fund. $10,000 of the fee would be payable 
during the application process, with the balance due upon close of 
escrow for each unit. 

Residential conversions are currently governed by Article 9 of the 
Subdivision Code of the San Francisco Municipal Code. Article 9 
contains an Annual Conversion Limitation, effective January 1, 1990 to 
December 31, 1993, which states that applications for conversion of 
residential units "shall not be accepted," except for 200 units selected 
by the Department of Public Works through an annual lottery. Any 
residential buildings so selected must qualify for conversion based on 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

1 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

the number of owner-occupied units they contain and the length of 
time that they have been owner-occupied. 

Other provisions of the Subdivision Code, governing the availability 
and construction of low and moderate income housing, have been 
suspended for as long as the conversion limitations of Article 9 remain 
in effect. 

The proposed ordinance states that its purpose is to provide a plan for 
home ownership conversions that is "exclusive of, independent from, 
and alternative to the plan for conversions set forth in Article 9," and 
that the 200-unit annual limit on conversions in Article 9 would not 
apply to conversions under the proposed Article 11. 

The proposed ordinance would also amend Section 1332 of the 
Subdivision Code, which requires that public hearings be held 
concerning proposed conversions of any property when at least one unit 
in the building is used for residential purposes. The proposed 
ordinance would provide that the public hearing required under 
Section 1332 would not be required for condominium conversions under 
the proposed Article 11. 

In addition, the proposed ordinance provides that the environmental 
impact evaluations required under Section 1332 of the Subdivision 
Code would not be required for proposed condominium conversions 
under the proposed ordinance. The existing Article 9, permitting 
conversion of up to 200 units per year, contains a similar waiver of the 
requirements of Section 1332. However, the Department of Public 
Works indicates that environmental impact evaluations can be 
required for some condominium conversion projects notwithstanding 
the statutory language. 

Application Requirements and Conditions of Approval: 

1. The proposed ordinance requires that the Director of City Planning 
conduct a lottery to be held 45 days following approval of the proposed 
ordinance by the Mayor, and to notify lottery applicants of the outcome 
within 15 days after the lottery is held. 

The following table illustrates the amount of time which would elapse 
between approval of the proposed ordinance by the Mayor and receipt 
of certain fees required under the proposed ordinance, if each stage of 
the procedure is completed at (but not sooner than) the deadline 
imposed under the proposed ordinance: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Number of Days 
Activity Allowed for Completion 

Lottery Held 45 Days After Approval by Mayor 45 

Notice to Applicants by Director of City Planning 15 

Deadline for Application for Certificate of Eligibility 120 
Conduct of Hearings if Requested by Tenants, and 

Issuance of Certificates of Eligibility by City Planning 50 
Deadline for Application for Tentative Map Approval, 

Including Minimum Payment of $10,000 60 

Maximum Number of Days From Enactment to 
Application for Map Approval and Payment of Fee 290 



2. Applicants who are selected in the lottery would be required to 
submit an "Application for Certificate of Eligibility" with supporting 
documents within 120 days of receipt of notification of their selection. 

The Application for Certificate of Eligibility would be required to 
include the signatures of tenants (the "Co-Signing Tenants") from at 
least two-thirds of the units, in buildings of 6 or more units, indicating 
their agreement to the proposed conversion. The agreement of tenants 
from 3 units would be required in a building of 5 or 4 units (equal to 60 
or 75 percent of the tenants, respectively). The agreement of tenants 
from 2 units would be required in a building of 3 or 2 units (67 or 100 
percent of the tenants, respectively). 

In addition, the application for a Certificate of Eligibility would be 
required to include Intent to Purchase Forms from tenants in at least 
50 percent of the units (for buildings with more than 5 units), 
indicating the tenants' intent to purchase their units. For buildings of 
5 units, Intent to Purchase Forms would be required of tenants in 3 
units (60 percent of the units). In buildings with 4, 3, or 2 units, Intent 
to Purchase Forms would be required from tenants in at least 2 units 
(50, 67, or 100 percent of tenants, respectively). 

The Application for Certificate of Eligibility would also be required to 
include: 

1) Identification of the building which is the subject of the 
application; 

2) A Building History detailing the date of construction, 
major uses and major repairs since construction, current 
ownership of the building and land, and the proposed form 
of the home ownership conversion; 

HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

3 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



3) A Report of Residential Record obtained from the 
Bureau of Building Inspection issued within the preceding 
90 days, and a statement that the report was delivered to 
tenants; 

4) A Rental History detailing for each unit in the building 
the approximate square footage, number of bedrooms, 
current or last rental rate, any vacancies over the 
preceding three years, names of current tenants and 
information as to those who are senior citizens or 
disabled, the length of time that the tenants have 
occupied the units, and the names of any other persons 
other than the tenants known to have resided in the 
building in the previous three years; 

5) A Statement of Repairs, Alterations, and 
Improvements, and their projected costs, that would be 
performed before the close of escrow for the sale of the 
first unit in the building; 

6) Plans for the assignment and use of all common areas 
and parking spaces for the building; 

7) Sales information for each unit occupied by a tenant, 
consisting of the maximum sales price, the minimum 
down payment, and, if seller financing is offered, the 
minimum amount to be financed, the maximum rate of 
interest, and the minimum term of the loan; 

8) A Declaration indicating that Tenant Intent to 
Purchase forms have been delivered to all tenants 
residing in the building as of the date of filing of the 
application and that the information required for the 
application was provided to the tenants. 

As noted above, the deadline for this stage of the application would be 
120 days following the Director of City Planning's notification to the 
applicant of their selection in the lottery. Any applicant who misses 
the deadline would be ineligible to proceed, and a replacement 
applicant would be selected from the Standby List of candidates who 
were not originally selected in the lottery. 

3. Within 10 days of the receipt of the Application for Certificate of 
Eligibility, the Director of City Planning would be required to notify 
tenants in the building of the condominium conversion application. 
Any tenants desiring a public hearing would be required to notify the 
Director of City Planning of the request within 10 days of the date that 
the Director's notice was sent to the tenants. The City Planning 
Commission would be required to hold such a hearing within 20 days of 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

4 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



the date the tenant's request for hearing was sent to the Director of 
City Planning. If these time periods were fully invoked, a hearing 
would be held within approximately 40 days following receipt by the 
Director of City Planning of the Application for Certificate of 
Eligibility. 

4. The Director of City Planning, following review of the applications, 
would be required to issue Certificates of Eligibility within 50 days 
after the applications are filed for projects meeting the statutory 
requirements for conversion. This would permit the Director of City 
Planning a period of 10 days following any hearing which is held in 
which to issue a Certificate of Eligibility to the applicant. 

5. An applicant for condominium conversion would be required to 
submit an "Application for Tentative Map Approval," including 
supporting documents and required fees, within 60 days after the 
Director of City Planning mails the Certificate of Eligibility to the 
applicant. The Application for Tentative Map Approval would be 
required to include: 

1) A building inspector's report issued by the Bureau of 
Building Inspection or private contractors; 

2) An estimated maintenance budget and reserve fund; 

3) A statement of procedures for the allocation of the reserve 
fund; 

4) The approved Certificate of Eligibility. 

The proposed ordinance states in a separate section (concerning 
conditions for approval of the application by the Director of City 
Planning) that the applicable fee must be filed with the Application for 
Tentative Map Approval. However, the requirement for payment of 
the fee is not included in the list of Tentative Map Approval 
Application requirements [Section 1402(b) of the proposed ordinance)]. 

6. As noted above, fees are required under the proposed ordinance 
equal to 5 percent of the gross sale price of each unit, but not less than 
$10,000. At least $10,000 of this fee must be submitted with the 
Application for Tentative Map Approval, and would not be refundable 
if the conversion were not completed. Any balance of the fee would be 
payable upon close of escrow for the sale of the unit on which the fee 
was assessed. 

7. Conditions for approval of the Application for Tentative Map 
Approval would be as follows: 

1) Payment of the fee, as described in Comment 6, above. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



2) The subdivider must offer an exclusive right to 
purchase each unit in the building to any tenant who 
occupied the unit when the Application for Certificate of 
Eligibility was originally filed, based upon the terms 
contained in the Application for Certificate of Eligibility. 
If the tenant does not exercise this right or is unable to 
close escrow within 6 months of the Purchase Agreement, 
the subdivider would be allowed to sell the unit without 
regard to the terms of the application. 

3) The subdivider is also required to offer a unit for sale 
to any tenant who was not in occupancy when the initial 
application was filed, although without restriction on the 
sale price. However, a "tenant" is defined in the proposed 
ordinance to mean only a tenant who occupied the 
premises when the application was filed, which appears to 
render this provision meaningless. 

4) Tenants who choose not to purchase their units shall 
be given the right to remain in their units for as long as 
they choose, unless they are evicted for reasons stated in 
the proposed ordinance. (The proposed ordinance 
provides that its provisions regarding evictions 
supsersede those of the Residential Rent Stabilization and 
Arbitration Ordinance). The tenants' right to remain in 
the unit cannot be assigned to others, except in the case of 
Senior Citizens under special circumstances. 

5) Rents charged to tenants who choose to remain in their 
units would be calculated based on the rent in effect when 
the Application for Certificate of Eligibility was filed, with 
adjustments based on the provisions of the Residential 
Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance. Additional 
rent increases would require that a petition be filed with 
the Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Board. 

6) Tenants who purchase their units would be required to 
pay a fee to the City if they sell the unit within 63 months 
from the date that escrow closed on the tenant's purchase 
of the unit. The fee would be 5 percent of the gross sale 
price on units sold within 15 months, and would decline 
over the remainder of the 63 month period. 

7) The Subdivider would be required to submit a 
promissory note for the balance of any fees due to the City 
after filing the Application for Tentative Map Approval. 
The promissory note would be secured by the Deed of 
Trust on each unit. When the unit is sold, the Deed of 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

6 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Trust would be conveyed to the tenant in exchange for a 
new promissory note from the tenant, which "shall be in 
full satisfaction of the Subdivider's obligations under the 
former note" and which would also enforce payment of 
fees due from the tenant if the unit is sold within 63 
months. 

8) Tenants who do not purchase their units but relocate 
within five years would be eligible to receive 
reimbursement for moving expenses as well as relocation 
assistance provided by the Subdivider. 



8. The building to be converted would be required to comply only with 
the building, safety, and zoning codes and other applicable laws which 
were in effect when the building was constructed. The proposed 
ordinance states that no new requirements concerning parking, room 
size, or improvements may be imposed as a condition of the conversion. 
However, reasonable health and safety regulations could be imposed if 
they apply equally to all other similar building structures in the City, 
regardless of the form of ownership, and if they are publicized by the 
City prior to the date that an Application for Certificate of Eligibility is 
filed. 



Comments: 



1. The Budget Analyst has asked the City Attorney whether, under 
California law, the assurances of continued occupancy by the tenant, as 
described at Comment No. 7, subsection 4) above, can be enforced. The 
proposed ordinance states that "each lease" with a tenant who chooses 
to remain would explicitly waive provisions of California law which 
might otherwise determine the tenant's right to continued occupancy. 
However, the question remains whether such a waiver would suffice to 
protect the tenant under California law. Moreover, it is not clear from 
the proposed ordinance what lease is referred to, since the proposed 
ordinance does not require that a new lease be negotiated. 

The Budget Analyst has also requested further clarification from the 
City Attorney regarding the respective obligations for payment of fees 
by the Subdivider and purchasing tenant, as described under Comment 
No. 7, subsection 7) above, since it is unclear whether the tenant would 
be required to assume the Subdivider's responsibility for payment of 
the original application fees, in addition to any fees resulting from the 
tenant's sale of the unit. 

2. As previously noted, Article 9 of the Subdivision Code currently 
limits the number of conversions to 200 units per year, which are 
selected through an annual lottery (on a calendar vear basis) conducted 
by the Department of Public Works (DPW). Mr. Greg Cruz of DPW 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

7 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



states that the last such lottery was held on March 13, 1992, resulting 
in the selection of 62 buildings containing a total of 200 units. A 
Standby List was created at that time of unsuccessful applicants for 
condominium conversion, involving 130 buildings containing a total of 
412 units. 

If the proposed ordinance were approved, conversion of 1,000 
additional units would be permitted. Based on the 412 units known to 
be on the Stand By list for condominium conversion at the present 
time, and a minimum fee of $10,000 per unit, the Budget Analyst 
estimates that the City could receive revenue of $4.12 million from the 
conversion of those units, provided that: 

1) The owners of the units are willing to pay the fees for 
condominium conversion required under the proposed 
ordinance; 

2) The units meet the requirements for conversion under 
the proposed ordinance, including written consent from 60 
to 100 percent of the tenants and Intent to Purchase 
Forms submitted by 50 to 100 percent of the tenants (see 
Comment No. 2 under Application Requirements, above); 

3) The application requirements under the proposed 
ordinance could be met prior to the deadlines established. 

Since the owners of these 412 units have sought to convert the 
buildings under Article 9, the Budget Analyst assumes that the units 
meet statutory requirements for condominium conversion which are 
already in effect. If this assumption is correct, then permitting the 
conversion of these units under the proposed Article 11 would not 
represent a departure from the types of buildings which are authorized 
for condominium conversion under existing law, although it would 
negate the effect of the current 200-unit limit on the number of 
conversions. 

Thus, 412 additional units could potentially be converted by 
authorizing conversions above the current 200-unit limit, without 
altering current restrictions on the types of buildings which may be 
converted. 

The existing Article 9 provides that only buildings with 6 or fewer 
units may be converted to condominiums, and requires that those 
buildings which are converted must have been owner-occupied for at 
least 3 years. According to Mr. Cruz, a building is not counted against 
the 200-unit limit if it contains only two units and both units have been 
owner-occupied for at least one year. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

8 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



In contrast, the proposed ordinance contains no restrictions on the 
types of buildings which can be converted to condominium use, and 
qualifying buildings would not be required to have been owner- 
occupied for any length of time. 

3. Ms. Barbara Kolesar of the Mayor's Office states that 
representatives of private enterprises have assured the Mayor's Office 
that demand for condominium conversions is sufficient to ensure that 
the minimum level of 1,000 units established under the proposed 
ordinance would be reached. If 1,000 units were converted under the 
proposed ordinance at a minimum fee of $10,000 per unit, then the 
City would receive minimum one-time revenues of $10 million. 

Since only 412 units are now on the Stand-By list of condominium 
conversions, the additional 588 to 688 units which could be converted 
under the proposed ordinance would probably involve buildings which 
presently are not eligible for condominium conversion, because they 
contain more than 6 units or have not been owner-occupied for three 
years, as required under Article 9. Ms. Kolesar agrees that buildings 
not now eligible for conversion are included in the Mayor's Office 
projection that 1,000 units would apply for conversion under the 
proposed ordinance. 

4. The proposed ordinance does not contain a sunset provision to 
indicate that the ordinance, if enacted, -would expire on a given date. 
Rather, the proposed ordinance states that "not less than 1,000 units 
nor more than 1,100 units shall be approved for conversion under this 
Article." The Budget Analyst interprets this statement to mean that 
the law would remain in effect until at least 1,000 units were converted 
pursuant to its provisions. Therefore, the revenues to be realized under 
the proposed ordinance would be one-time revenues. 

The possibility exists that some percentage of the revenue which would 
be generated under the proposed ordinance would accrue to the City 
after the current 1992-93 fiscal year. The extent to which the revenue 
is received in 1992-93 or in later years depends on the number of 
Applications for Tentative Map Approval which are filed in the current 
year or in subsequent years. 

The lottery would be held 45 days after the proposed ordinance, if 
approved by the Board of Supervisors, is signed by the Mayor. It is not 
possible to determine at this time whether applications for conversion 
of 1,000 units would be submitted within the 45 day period before the 
lottery would be held. The proposed ordinance contains no provisions 
for a subsequent lottery, if 1,000 units are not selected from the initial 
lottery. Even if 1,000 units were selected, it is not certain that 1,000 
applications would he filed during 1992-93. Applicants who fail to 
meet the deadline for filing the Application for Certificate of Eligibility 
would he replaced by applicants from a Stand-By list of lottery 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

9 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



applicants, who would begin the procedure later in the year. In 
addition, the complexity of the applications may create delays in filing 
Applications for Tentative Map Approval, including payment of fees. 

As noted above, the time allocated for application procedures under the 
proposed ordinance, regardless of the number of applications 
submitted, is 290 days. If the proposed ordinance were approved by 
the Board of Supervisors in mid-August and signed by the Mayor 
immediately thereafter, and if the 290 days allowed for application 
procedures under the proposed ordinance were fully utilized, but not 
exceeded (approximately 9 months and 20 days), the City would not 
receive revenues under the proposed ordinance until the end of May, 
1993. Revenues would be received at an earlier date only if some of the 
applications were processed in less than 290 days. 

5. According to Mr. Steve Dunbar of the Assessor's Office, the sale of 
units converted to condominiums results in reassessment of the value 
of the property, resulting in a higher property tax base, as well as 
transfer taxes on the sale price of the unit. The Budget Analyst notes 
that since application procedures would require almost ten months 
under the proposed ordinance, and since escrow on the sale of units 
could entail an additional 60 days, it is doubtful that the City would 
receive such additional tax revenues during fiscal year 1992-93. Mr. 
Dunbar indicates that conversion of the property to a new form of 
ownership does not, in itself, result in significantly higher tax 
revenues. 

6. Ms. Kolesar states that the provisions of the proposed ordinance 
would tend to protect affordable housing in San Francisco, since the 
required fees would impose a disincentive to owners of low or moderate 
income housing to convert their property to condominiums. The 
Budget Analyst notes that any such effects would therefore also 
prevent low and moderate income households from realizing the 
benefits of home ownership envisioned by the proposal. 

The Budget Analyst further notes that although properties now 
classified as low or moderate income housing may be less likely to 
undergo conversion under the proposed ordinance, total demand for 
rental housing is likely to remain unchanged, resulting in a higher 
level of demand for the remaining rental properties. Such an effect 
would tend to disadvantage low and moderate income households, who 
could be displaced by renters at higher income levels in the face of 
increased competition for fewer rental units. 

7. The provisions of the Subdivision Code which were suspended while 
the 200-unit limit remains in effect contain provisions to preserve low 
and moderate income housing as a condition of condominium 
conversion. The suspended provisions are: 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Article 1. Section 1341 . which requires that in all condominium or 
cooperative conversions of more than five lots or units, 10 percent of 
the lots or units would be made available for rent or purchase by low or 
moderate income households, and imposes restrictions on the rental or 
purchase price; and, 

Article 9. Section 1385 . which requires that in the case of any 
condominium or cooperative conversions, the Department of City 
Planning shall determine whether the properties are part of the City's 
low and moderate income housing stocks, and imposes restrictions on 
the sales price of any converted units found to be part of the low and 
moderate income housing stocks. 

Mr. Joe Latorre of the Mayor's Office of Housing and Mr. Andrew 
Schwartz of the City Attorney's Office have indicated that these 
sections of the Subdivision Code were suspended in part because they 
were ineffectual, somewhat vague, and difficult to achieve, and not 
simply because of the 200-unit limit on the number of conversions. Mr. 
Latorre reports that an inter- departmental Affordable Housing Task 
Force recommended in 1986 that requiring financial payments from 
developers to subsidize affordable housing projects would be more 
effective than the requirements of Sees. 1341 and 1385. 

Mr. Schwartz indicates that the City Attorney's Office is currently 
engaged in major revisions of the Subdivision Code. 

8. Mr. Dunbar has provided statistics compiled by the Assessor for 
1991 (since 1992 figures are not yet complete), showing the composition 
of the City's residential housing stock. The major categories of 
residential real estate reported by the Assessor, the number of units in 
1991, and the percent of the total for each category are as follows: 



Real Estate Class Number of Units* 


Percent of Total 


Apartments 132,391 


43.0 


Cooperative Units 1,953 


0.6 


Dwellings (single family homes) 99,141 


32.1 


Dwellings and Apartments 339 


0.1 


Flats and Duplexes 50,454 


16.4 


Flat and Store 9,530 


3.0 


Condominiums 14.845 


_jLS 



Total 308,653 100 

* 206 units in minor classes, and 500 units in miscellaneous or other classifications, 
have been omitted. 

According to Mr. Dunbar, additional condominium conversions arc 
most likely to occur in the "Apartments" classification. Conversion of 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



1,000 of the 132,391 units reported in this class for 1991 would 
represent a reduction of 0.76 percent (approximately three-quarters of 
one percent) in this residential housing component from the 1991 level. 

9. San Francisco voters considered a proposition (Proposition N) in the 
November, 1991 election which would have modified Article 9 of the 
Subdivision Code by creating exemptions to the 200-unit annual limit, 
and allowing any residential rental unit to be converted for 
condominium use, provided, among other things, that: 

1) More than half of the tenants in the building agreed to 
the conversion; 

2) Tenants electing not to purchase their units were 
issued leases valid until their death or until they vacated 
the premises ; 

3) Tenants were granted non-transferable rights to 
purchase their units at 75 percent of the fair market value 
of the unit, based on the unit's value at the time the 
condominium conversion application was filed; and, 

4) The Subdivider provided financing for 90 percent of the 
purchase price to tenants wishing to purchase their units. 

Proposition N was defeated in November, 1991 by a vote of 33.4 
percent in favor and 66.6 percent opposed. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

Gaming T^hlfiff 

Item; 

The proposed draft ordinance is regarding legalizing gaming clubs in San 
Francisco. 

Description: 

A gaming club would be defined as a business or enterprise licensed for the 
playing of card games permitted by the State of California under Title 9 of the 
California Penal Code. The proposed draft ordinance was not prepared by the City 
Attorney's Office, but rather was modeled after an existing ordinance in San 
Bruno. The City Attorney is currently drafting a proposed ordinance in final 
form. Under the proposed ordinance, no more than one gaming club license can 
be authorized in the City at any one time, with no more than 80 playing tables 
located at the one gaming club. 

The proposed draft ordinance outlines conditions which must be met by the 
a gaming club applicant. These conditions include that the property line for the 
gaming club premises must be located at least 400 feet from any residentially 
zoned property, and at least one block from public transportation. In addition, the 
gaming club premises must be capable of parking a minimum of 100 cars, and be 
capable of expansion of the parking facilities. The Chief Administrative Officer 
would prepare a list of applicants and submit the list to the Board of Supervisors. 
The Board of Supervisors may either approve the license applied for, conditionally 
approve the application, or deny the application. A license issued under the 
provisions of the proposed ordinance would remain valid until either surrendered 
by the licensee, suspended by the Chief of Police, or suspended or revoked by the 
Board of Supervisors, or 25 years from the issuance of the occupancy permit, 
whichever comes first. 

The proposed draft ordinance outlines the following fees which would be 
payable to the City: 

Application Fees 

$5,000 Non-refundable gaming club license fee 

1,000 "Pointholder" application fee. A "pointholder" is all persons 

(individual, corporation or legal entity) having an ownership 
interest in the gaming club. Each "pointholder" would be 
assessed this fee. 
250 "Pointholder" transfer fee for transfers of ownership 

100 Employee work permit fee for any person employed by the club 

Quarterly License Fees 

$10,000 Quarterly License Fees, payable four times a year which would 

result in $40,000 in annual revenues to the City. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 



Gross Revenue License Fees 

10 percent of the gross revenues 
6 percent of total entry fees for tournaments 

Under the proposed draft ordinance, gross revenues are defined as player 
seat rental fees, and any and all other table revenues, but does not include 
entertainment revenue, food and beverage receipts, employee tips or valet parking 
charges or revenue received from retail activities. 

Commoner 

1. The following gross revenues realized by gaming clubs from their 
playing tables have been estimated for a few cities in California which currently 
operate gaming clubs: 





Number 


Gross Revenues 


Estimated Annus 


City 


of Tables 


Per Table 


Gross Revenues* 


Bell Garden 


170 


$604,700 


$102.8 million 


Commerce 


170 


445,900 


$75.8 million 


Emeryville 


45 


364,400 


$16.4 million 


Gardenia 


94 


462,800 


$43.5 million 


San Jose 


47 


348,900 


$16.4 million 



* Annual gross revenues estimated are based upon the percentage of gross 
receipts received by the cities. It should be noted that gaming clubs in these other 
cities have been established for a longer period of time, and therefore, gross 
revenues generated in San Francisco may not be as high for a newly established 
club. The projected gross revenues for gaming clubs in San Jose may increase for 
fiscal year 1992-93 pending the approval of a proposed ordinance which would 
authorize a greater number of card games. 

2. As noted above, one gaming club with a maximum of 80 tables would be 
authorized to operate in the City under the proposed draft ordinance. The 
estimated gross revenues per table estimated for other California cities ranges 
between approximately $604,700 per table for Bell Garden to approximately 
$348,900 per table for San Jose. Based on this range, the annual Gross Revenue 
License Fee revenues to San Francisco could be estimated at approximately $2.79 
million to $4.84 million, assuming the City would receive 10 percent of gross 
revenues, and assuming 80 tables would be operated at one club. 

3. Although the annual Gross Revenue License Fee revenues to San 
Francisco could be estimated at approximately $2.79 million to $4.84 million, the 
actual revenues for FY 1992-93 may be significantly less than this projected 
amount because it may be several months before the proposed ordinance is 
implemented, the application process is completed and the gaming club is fully 
operational. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



Report to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1992 

4. As noted above, the City Attorney's Office is currently drafting the 
proposed ordinance. The gaming club located in San Francisco could also be 
subject to the City's Payroll and Gross Receipts taxes in addition to the proposed 
Gross Revenues License Fees. 

5. Therefore, the total revenue anticipated to be generated to the City 
annually would be as follows: 

$ 5,000 Non-refundable gaming club license fee 

1,000 "Pointholder" application fee (assumes only one "pointholder") 

- "Pointholder" transfer fee (assumes no transfers of ownership) 

Employee work permits not included because the number of 
employees cannot be determined at this time). 
40.000 Quarterly License Fees 

$46,000 Subtotal 

$2.79 million - 
$4.84 million Gross Revenue License Fees 

$2.84 million - 
$4.89 million Total Estimated Annual Revenues to the City, Excluding 

Payroll and Gross Receipts Taxes and Employee Work Permits 
Revenues 

6. The City departments which would incur costs from the proposed 
ordinance would be the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) which 
would process the applications and the Police Department, which would 
investigate the gaming club applications, including an investigation of the 
proposed premises and any violations. The City would also incur auditing costs 
for the auditing of records and accounts relating to the gross revenues and of all 
other licenses. These costs cannot be determined at this time. 



BOARD OF SU1»KKVIS( >KS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



6( 




(PuBCic Library, ^Documents (Dcpt 
WTHDi: Qerry^pth 



CITY AND COUNTY =t h~ $ ffl O F S AN FR ANC I S C O 



OARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 

July 7, 1992 

/// 

/ / / 
TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst 

SUBJECT: July 9, 1992 Recessed Budget Review Meeting 

Item 1 - File 100-92-5 

Note: This item was recessed from the Finance Committee meeting of July 2, 
1992. 



1. This is a hearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the 
revenues of the City and County of San Francisco. 

2. As of the writing of this report, several different proposals by the 
Governor and various portions of the California Legislature exist and no final 
steps have been taken toward final adoption of the 1992-93 State budget. Until such 
final adoption, we are unable to assess the exact impact on the revenues and 
expenditures of the City and County of San Francisco. 

3. The Controller, the Mayor's Office and the Budget Analyst will report 
their latest information on the State budget at the Finance Committee's meeting of 
July 9, 1992. 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 9, 1992 



Item 2 -File 100-92-1 



Note: This item was recessed from the Finance Committee meeting of July 2, 1992. 

This item is a hearing to consider the Annual Budget of the City and 
County of San Francisco for fiscal year 1992-93. 

Please see the Budget Analyst's reports dated June 24, 25 and 26, 1992 
entitled Recommendations of the Budget Analyst for Amendment of the Mayor's 
Fiscal Year 1992-93 Budget. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 9, 1992 

Items 3 and 4 - Files 101-92-2 and 102-92-2 

Note: These items were recessed from the Finance Committee at its meeting of 
July 2, 1992. 

The proposed Annual Appropriation Ordinance reflects revenues and 
expenditures as contained in the Mayor's recommended 1992-93 budget. The 
proposed Annual Salary Ordinance for Fiscal Year 1992-93 reflects the positions 
as contained in the Mayor's recommended 1992-93 budget. 

Commpnt 

The Budget Analyst has made numerous recommendations regarding 
reductions and changes to the Mayor's recommended 1992-93 budget. The 
Finance Committee has accepted an estimated $5.5 million of the Budget 
Analyst's recommendations. 




Harvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



0.25 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

Xcn JUL 14 1992 

CALENDAR c .. lcn , 
SAN FRANCISCO 

SPECIAL MEETING OF PUBLIC LIBR ARY 

FINANCE COMMITTEE 
ABOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 1992 - 2:00 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

PRESENT: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, MIGDEN, HALLINAN 

CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 

NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 

counter in the Office of the Clerk, of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 



File 100-92-5 . Hearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the revenue 
of the City and County of San Francisco. (Supervisor Migden) 
(Continued from 7/8/92) 

ACTION: 



FINANCE COMMITTEE 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
ROOM 235, CITY HALL 
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 



IMPORTANT 
HEARING NOTICE 



Govt Documents 
Public Library 
Civic Center 
S.F. CA 94102 



D 0246 



B/s|' 



#/ CALENDAR 

n\ MEETING OF DU^u 

FINANCE COMMITTEE JUL 1 3 > yy ^ 

^BOARD OF SUPERVISORS „.e C0 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO SAN F baN „' , r v 

PUBLIC UBR^ 

///// ' 

WEDNESDAY. JULY 15. 1992 - 2:00 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, MIGDEN, HALLINAN 

CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 

NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 
counter in the Office of the Clerk of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 



CONSENT CALENDAR 

All matters listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are considered to be 
routine by the Finance Committee, and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote 
of the Committee. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a 
member of the Committee or a member of the public so requests, in which event the 
matter shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a separate 
item. 

(a) File 25-92-24 . [Contracting Out City Services] Resolution concurring with the 
Controller's certification that parking meter revenue collection can be 
practically performed by private contractor for lower cost than similar work 
services performed by City and County employees. (Department of Parking 
and Traffic) 

(b) File 28-92-8 . [Emergency Repair] Resolution authorizing the Director of the 
Department of Public Works to take necessary measures to protect the health, 
welfare and property of the citizens of San Francisco by performing the 
necessary work to clean the sewer in Fifth Street between Folsom and Bryant 
Streets - $75,000. (Department of Public Works) 

(c) File 28-92-9 . [Emergency Repair] Resolution authorizing the Director of the 
Department of Public Works to take necessary measures to protect the health, 
welfare and property of the citizens of San Francisco by performing the 
necessary work to replace the failing sewer in Stockton Street between 
Broadway and Pacific Avenue - $74,940. (Department of Public Works) 

(d) File 64-92-22 . [Lease of Property] Resolution authorizing lease of real 
property at 233 Post Street for the Fine Arts Museum. (Real Estate 
Department) 



(e) File 94-92-4 . [Grant - Regional Funds] Resolution authorizing the Public 
Utilities Commission to apply for and accept $3.1 million of Bridge Toll Funds 
for SFMRIC lease payments and $51.5 million of regional funds such as Federal 
Transit Administration Sections 8 and 9 Operating Revenues, Transportation 
Development Act (TDA), State Transit Assistance (STA), AB 1107 half-cent 
sales tax, and Bay Area Rapid Transit District funds for 1992-93 Municipal 
Railway Operations and authorizing the expenditure of the Section 8 Planning 
funds. (Public Utilities Commission) 

(f) File 94-92-5 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Public Utilities 
Commission to apply for, accept and accept $1,704,000 including an estimated 
$119,280 of indirect costs from 1992-93 State Traffic System Management 
funds for the Municipal Railway and also to apply for, accept and expend 
available Federal Petroleum Violation Escrow Account funds to support signal 
system pre-emption and other energy efficient transportation improvements. 
(Public Utilities Commission) 

(g) File 146-92-29 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the 
Department of Public Health, Community Public Health Services, Special 
Programs for Youth as a sub-grantee, in collaboration with Northern California 
Pediatric AIDS Treatment Center as prime grantee, to accept and expend an 
allocation of $244,840 which includes indirect costs in the amount of $11,659 
based on five percent of direct costs, from the National Institute of Health, 
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, for establishing clinical 
trail subunits and health services for youth. (Department of Public Health) 

(h) File 146-92-50 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Department 
of Public Health, AIDS Office, to accept and expend a supplemental allocation 
of $150,000 from the California Department of Health Services to continue 
funding the AIDS Drug Program; providing for ratification of action previously 
taken. (Department of Public Health) 

(i) File 146-92-51 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Department 
of Public Health, AIDS Office, to accept and expend a grant not to exceed 
$2,615,796 which includes indirect costs not to exceed $75,322 based on ten 
percent of personnel costs, from the California Department of Health Services 
to continue funding the Master Grant Agreement; providing for ratification of 
action previously taken. (Department of Public Health) 

(j) File 147-92-2.1 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the City 

Librarian to accept and expend funds not to exceed $696,579 available through 
the California State Library from Title II of the Library Services and 
Construction Act for Public Library construction, which includes indirect costs 
of the amount of $43,997 or five percent of the total; companion measure to 
File 147-92-2. (Public Library) 



(k) File 147-92-4 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the execution of 
grant contract with the California State Library for the award of a grant of 
Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act funds, which contract provides 
for the State to be indemnified and held harmless from all claims or damages 
which may arise in relation to the contract. (Public Library) 

(1) File 30-92-7 . [Performance Contract for Mental Health Services] Resolution 
approving the San Francisco City and County Performance Contract for mental 
health services in Fiscal year 1991-92. (Department of Public Health) 

(m) File 94-92-3 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Public Utilities 
Commission to apply for, accept and expend $28,814,387 from 1991-92 State 
Proposition 116 Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act funds and 
$28,814,387 from local match funds to provide financing including $1,640,169 
of estimated indirect costs for nine Municipal Railway capital projects. 
(Public Utilities Commission) 

(n) File 146-92-21.1 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the 

Department of Public Health, Bureau of Toxics, Health and Safety Services, to 
accept and expend a grant of $49,950, which includes indirect costs of $3,800 
based on twenty percent of Department of Public Health salaries from the 
California Department of Fish & Game for the development of the San 
Francisco Oil Spill Prevention and Response Plan. (Department of Public 
Health) 

(o) File 146-92-49 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the 

Department of Public Health, Community Public Health, Special Project for 
Youth, to accept and expend a grant of $90,466 from the Larkin Street Youth 
Center as the primary grantee of a grant from the Health Resources and 
Services Administration, for comprehensive health care to high risk and 
HTV-Positive youth; waiving indirect costs. (Department of Public Health) 

(p) File 146-92-15.1 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, 
Department of Public Health, AIDS Office, in an amount totalling $200,529, 
for two contractors ($110,837 Mission Neighborhood Health Center, for 
treatment advocacy, clinical trials advocacy and nutritional counseling, and 
$89,692 Bayview Hunters Point Foundation for augmentation of its current 
detoxification services to HrV positive substance abusers of Color with 
traditional Chinese medicine treatments.) (Department of Public Health) 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

File 25-92-22 . [Contracting Out City Services - Police Department] Resolution 
concurring with the Controller's certification that janitorial services can be 
practically performed for San Francisco Police Department facilities by private 
contractor for lower cost than similar work services performed by City and County 
employees. (Police Department) 
(Cont'd from 7/8/92) 

ACTION: 



3. File 94-91-4.3 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, Public 
Utilities Commission, in the amount of $65,000, for Municipal Railway Contract No. 
MR-1039-R, Curtis E. Green Light Rail Facility, Geneva Site, Maintenance Building, 
Paint Booth Fans Modification. (Public Utilities Commission) 

(Cont'd from 6/3/92) 

ACTION: 

4. File 65-92-10 . [Sublease of Property] Ordinance authorizing and approving sublease 
of City-owned property at 25 Van Ness Avenue, portion of First Floor (Lot 4, Block 
834) to the Veterans Administration, commencing August 1, 1992. (Real Estate 
Department) 

ACTION: 

5. File 52-92-4 . [Authorization to Expend Private Funds] Resolution authorizing 
Department of Public Works to accept $5,176 monetary compensation from property 
owners for the higher cost of procuring and installing special ornamental streetlight 
poles in Upper Ashbury Undergrounding District 309, Phase 2C. (Department of 
Public Works) 

ACTION: 

6. File 61-92-6 . [Extending Duration and Increasing Contract Cost] Resolution 
approving Contract Modifications No. 1 and No. 2 to Water Department Contract 
WD-2088, repaving of street and sidewalk openings for the San Francisco Water 
Department for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 1992. (Public Utilities Commission) 

ACTION: 

7. File 114-92-6. [Fees] Ordinance amending Part II, Chapter 1, of the San Francisco 
Municipal Code (Building Code) by adding Section 333.5 to impose fees for 
administering the unreinforced masonry building retrofit program. (Supervisor 
Achtenberg) 

(Transferred from City Services Committee 7/7/92 - Fiscal Impact) 

ACTION: 



FINANCE COMMITTEE 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
ROOM 235, CITY HALL 
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 



IMPORTANT 
HEARING NOTICE 



n Go *t Do ClJ ,n ents 
r Publ ''c Library 
C,vi 'c Center 
S - F - CA 94102 



0246 



to 



CITY AND COUNTY 




(PubCic Library, (Documents CDept 

OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 



TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst 

SUBJECT: July 15, 1992 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item la - File 25-92-24 



July 13, 1992 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

JUL H 1992 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Department: 
Item: 



Services to 
be Performed: 

Description: 



Parking and Traffic 

Resolution concurring with Controller's Certification of 
Costs required by Charter Section 8.300-1 (Proposition J) that 
certain services can continue to be practically performed by a 
private contractor for a lower cost than similar work 
performed by City employees. 

Parking meter revenue collections 

The Controller has determined that contracting for these 
parking meter revenue collection services in fiscal year 1992- 
93 would result in estimated savings as follows: 



City Operating Service Costs 

Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 
Operating Expenses 
Total 

Contracted Service Cost 

Estimated Savings 



Lowest 

Salary 

Step 


Highest 

Salary 

Step 


$417,222 

109,811 

39.382 

$566,415 


$493,551 

125,650 

39.382 

$658,583 


371.323 


371.323 


$195,092 


$287,260 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Comments: 1. Parking meter revenue collection services were first 

certified by Charter Section 8.3001-1 in 1978 and have been 
provided by an outside contractor since then. 

2. The one-year contract with Burns International Securities 
Services, which expired June 30, 1992, included an option to 
extend the contract for the period July 1, 1992 to June 30, 1993. 
The Contracted Service Cost used for the purpose of this 
analysis is an informal bid from the current contractor. 
Burns International Securities is not a City-certified MBE or 
WBE. 

3. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department of Parking and Traffic responses, including the 
MBE/WBE status of this contract, is attached. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



JUL-13-'92 MON 10:48 IDrDEPT PARKING & TRAFF FAX N0:415 554 9834 tt542 P02 



Charter 8.300-1 (Proposition J) Questionnaire 



Department Parking and Traffic 



Contract Services Collecting of Parking Meter Reve nue 
Time Perio d July 1, 1992 to June 30. 1993 

1) Who performed services prior to contracting out? 

City Employees 

2) Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting 
out? 

None 

3) Explain disposition of employees if they were laid off. 
Charged with stealing public funda. The positions were abolished. 

4) What percent of City employee's time is spent on services to be 
contracted out? 

None 

5) How long have services been contracted out? 
Since March 1978 

6) What was the first fiscal year for a . Proposition J 
Certification? 

1978 

7) Kow will contract services meet the goals of your MBE/WBE 
Action Plan? 

The Contract will be bid and awarded by the Purchaser of the City and County 
of San Francisco in accordance with all applicable City Ordinances. Locally 
owned MBE/WBE will be solicited to bid on the contract in accordance with 
the past practice of that office. 



tment Representatii 



Depar 



Lee Poteet, Sr. Management Assistant 

(Type Name, Title) 

55A-9819 

Telephone 

cxlquespj 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Item lb -File 28-92-8 



Department: 
Item: 



Amount: 



Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the Director of Public Works to take 
necessary measures to protect the health, welfare and 
property of the citizens of San Francisco by performing the 
necessary work to clean the sewer in Fifth Street between 
Folsom Street and Bryant Street. 

$75,000 



Source of Funds: Sewer Service Charge 

Description: The DPW has determined that the six-foot sewer in Fifth 

Street between Folsom Street and Bryant Street is plugged 
with an estimated 400 cubic yards of material, causing 
sewage back-ups in the area, which constitutes a hazard to 
the public health and welfare. 

In accordance with Section 6.30 of the Administrative Code, 
DPW initiated an expedited contracting procedure for the 
necessary emergency maintenance work on the sewer. DPW 
contracted with Shimmick/Nationwide Construction Inc., a 
Joint Venture firm. Nationwide Construction Inc. is a City- 
certified WBE firm. The maintenance contract is in the 
estimated amount of $75,000. 

Comments: 1. Mr. Richard Cunningham of the DPW reports that the 

DPW formally declared that an emergency existed, as a 
result of the plugged sewer, on June 17, 1992. 

2. Mr. Cunningham advises that the maintenance work 
commenced on June 22, 1992 and is anticipated to be 
completed by July 31, 1992. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



HOARD OF SUPKKV1SORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Item lc -File 28-92-9 



Department 
Item: 



Amount: 



Source of Funds: 



Description: 



Comments: 



Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the Director of the Department of 
Public Works to take necessary measures to protect the 
health, welfare and property of the citizens of San Francisco 
by performing the necessary work to replace the failing sewer 
in Stockton Street between Broadway and Pacific Avenue. 

$74,940 

Clean Water Program Fund, Sewer Repair and Replacement 
Maintenance Fund 

The DPW has determined that the existing brick sewer in 
Stockton Street is structurally failing and is in danger of 
collapse, which constitutes a hazard to the public health and 
welfare. 

In accordance with Section 6.30 of the Administrative Code, 
DPW initiated an expedited contracting procedure for the 
necessary construction work on the damaged sewer. DPW 
contracted with Coastal Construction Project Management, 
Inc. a City-certified MBE firm, on an emergency basis. 
Project costs are summarized as follows: 



Construction Contract 
DPW Bureau of Engineering 
Construction Management (DPW) 
Contingency 
Total 



$74,940 

12,600 

12,000 

7.494 

$107,034 



1. As noted above, the total project cost for the emergency 
construction work is $107,034. The proposed legislation 
incorrectly includes an amount of $74,940, which represents 
the Construction Contract cost only. Therefore, the proposed 
legislation should be amended to reflect total construction 
costs of $107,034 instead of $74,940. 

2. Mr. Ramsis Attia of the DPW reports that the DPW 
formally declared that an emergency existed due to the 
damaged sewer, on June 11, 1992. 

2. Mr. Attia advises that tbe construction work is anticipated 
to commence on July 17, 1992 and is projected to be completed 
by August 7, 1992. 



HOARD OF SIIPKKVISQHS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

5 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed legislation to reflect total construction 
costs of $107,034, instead of $74,940 and approve the proposed 
legislation as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item Id - File 64-92-22 



Department: 
Item: 

Location: 

Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 

No.ofSq.Ftand 
Cost per Month: 

Annual Cost: 

% Increase 
Over 1991-92: 



Fine Arts Museum 

Resolution authorizing lease of real property at 233 Post 
Street for the Fine Arts Museum. 

233 Post Street, portion of third floor and entire fifth and sixth 
floors 

Offices for the Fine Arts Museum staff while seismic 
upgrading of the Palace of the Legion of Honor is being done. 

Jay D. McEvoy, et al. 



Approximately 8,000 square feet 
$8,000 per month. 

$96,000 



Not applicable. This is a new lease. 



$1 per square foot, or 



Utilities and Janitor 
Services Provided by 

Lessor: No. The City is responsible for paying for electricity and 

janitorial costs, which are estimated to be $1,000 per month. 



Term of Lease: 



Right of Renewal: 



Source of Funds: 
Description: 



August 1, 1992 or upon satisfactory completion of certain 
required alterations by Lessor through July 31, 1995. 

The City would have the right to terminate the proposed lease 
if funds are not appropriated in subsequent fiscal years. In 
addition, the proposed lease provides the City with the option 
of assigning the lease to the Corporation for the Fine Arts 
Museum, and provides the option of extending the lease for 
an additional three years beyond July 31, 1995. 

1989 Earthquake Safety Bond Fund 

The Fine Arts Museum is required to vacate the existing 
offices at the Palace of the Legion of Honor while seismic 
upgrading of that facility takes place. It is estimated that the 
seismic work will require two and a half years to complete. 
In October, 1991, the Board of Supervisors authorized a new 
lease of real property for the Fine Arts Museum offices at 795 
8th Avenue for a term starting January 1, 1992 and ending 
December 31, 1997 (File 64-91-29). This office space consisted 



BOARD OF SUPKKVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

7 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

of 7,070 square feet at $1.25 per square foot per month (or 
$8,837.50 per month, for an annual cost of $106,050). 

The Lessor for the property at 795 8th Avenue, Taldan 
Investment Company, subsequently went into foreclosure on 
the 8th Avenue property. Taldan's lender, Intergon, 
contacted the Fine Arts Museum in March, 1992, and 
informed the Museum that Taldan had defaulted on the 
property. The lease which the City had executed with Taldan 
had provided that Taldan had until seven months after the 
Board of Supervisors enacted the legislation authorizing the 
execution of the lease (or until May 9, 1992, since the Board 
approved the legislation on October 9, 1991) to deliver the 
property to the Fine Arts Museum for occupancy. Since 
Taldan was unable to deliver the 8th Avenue property to the 
Museum by May 9, 1992, the City terminated the lease with 
Taldan. 

Presently, the Fine Arts Museum's administrative offices are 
located within the Legion of Honor and, according to Ms. 
Debbie Frieden of the Fine Arts Museum, it is imperative that 
the offices be vacated by August 31, 1992, so that the seismic 
upgrading of the Legion of Honor may proceed on a timely 
basis. 

The Real Estate Department advises that upon the completion 
of the seismic upgrading of the Legion of Honor, the lease 
provides that the City has the option to assign the remaining 
term of this proposed lease to the Corporation of the Fine Arts 
Museum (COFAM), a non-profit corporation whose sole 
purpose is to support the projects and activities of the Fine 
Arts Museum. 

Comments: 1. Ms. Frieden advises that the Museum's administrative 

and accounting offices at the Legion of Honor presently 
occupy approximately 8,126 square feet. 

2. Ms. Frieden reports that if the Museum exercises its 
option to assign the lease for 233 Post Street to COFAM, this is 
liKely to occur after July 31, 1995, when the seismic 
upgrading project is scheduled to be completed. As 
previously noted, the proposed lease is drafted to provide the 
option of renewing the lease for an additional three years 
beyond July 31, 1995. Ms. Frieden indicates that if the Fine 
Arts Museum exercises its option to assign the lease to 
COFAM beginning on August 1, 1995, funding for the 
proposed lease would be paid through COFAM funds, the 
source of which is private donations, museum memberships 
and revenues from museum shops and events. Ms. Frieden 
reports that COFAM would use the premises for office space 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

8 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



for the Fine Arts Museum staff, which includes City as well 
as privately funded employees, who currently occupy various 
locations. 

3. Mr. Lloyd Gardner of the Real Estate Department reports 
that the proposed annual rent of $96,000 reflects below fair 
market value for the property because the Lessor is a strong 
supporter of the Fine Arts Museum. After reviewing the 
proposed lease to ensure that City bond funds would be used 
appropriately, the Chief Administrative Officer recommends 
to proceed with the proposed lease funded through City bond 
funds. 

4. Mr. Gardner advises that the Lessor would provide all 
tenant improvements at the space at 233 Post Street at the 
Lessor's sole expense. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 






BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

9 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Item le - File 94-92-4 



Departments: 
Item: 



Grant Amount: 



Source of Funds: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Resolution authorizing the Public Utilities Commission to 
apply for and accept $3.1 million of Bridge Toll Funds to fund 
the San Francisco Municipal Railway Improvement 
Corporation (SFMRIC) lease payments and $51.5 million of 
regional funds such as Federal Transit Administration 
(FTA) Sections 8 and 9 Operating Revenues, Transportation 
Development Act (TDA), State Transit Assistance (STA), AB 
1107 half-cent sales tax revenues, and Bay Area Rapid 
Transit District funds for the 1992-93 Municipal Railway 
Operations, and authorizing the expenditure of the Section 8 
Planning funds. 

$54.7 million 



Operations 

TDA Article 3, 4, 4.5 
MUNI Operations 
STA Revenue Operating 

Assistance 
AB 1107 Half Cent 

Sales Tax 
FTA Section 8 Planning 
FTA Section 9 Operating 
BART Transfer Payment 

Total Operations 

Capital Improvements 
Bridge Toll Funds (for 

SFMRIC Lease 

Payments) 

Total Claims 



1992-93 1991-92 Increase 

Proposed Actual (Decrease) 



$18,162,041 $23,362,041 ($5,200,000) 
6,041,229 6,255,767 (214,538) 



18,188,892 

64,000 

7,507,831 

1.614.900 



19,858,892 (1,670,000) 

41,200 22,800 

7,507,831 (0) 

1.562.100 52.800 



$51,578,893 $58,587,831 ($7,008,938) 

$3.132.070 $3.358.285 (226.215) 
$54,710,963 $61,946,116 ($7,235,153) 



BOARD OF SUlMHtVlSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



As part of the allocation during FY 1992-93, the BART 
District has committed $1,614,900 as a reimbursement to 
MUNI, which has been calculated as the value of patron trips 
made on MUNI to and from BART. 



Comments: 1. The proposed resolution is the annual application for 

MUNI operating assistance for its share of State funds 
allocated by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission 
(MTC) for 1992-93 MUNI operations and capital 
improvements. The 1992-93 capital improvement funds are to 
be spent for the replacement of trolley buses and the 
rehabilitation of MUNI facilities. The operating assistance 
funds will be used to help support MUNI's annual budget. 

2. An "expend" clause is not included in the proposed 
resolution regarding the Federal and State funds except for 
the $64,000 in Section 8 Planning funds because authority for 
the spending of these funds, with the one exception of the 
Section 8 monies, will be included by the Board of Supervisors 
with the approval of the 1992-93 MUNI budget. Since the 
$64,000 is excluded from the budget approval process, the 
proposed resolution only requests authority to spend the 
$64,000 in planning funds. According to Ms. Kathleen Kelly 
of PUC's Finance Bureau, the $64,000 is excluded from the 
MUNI budget (and from the budget approval process) 
because the $64,000 is an annual project grant and is tracked 
as such by PUC. 

3. The proposed resolution should be amended to authorize 
the PUC to apply for and accept $51.6 million rather than 
$51.5 million of regional funds, as the PUC anticipates 
applying for $51,578,893, as reflected in the above budget. Ms. 
Kathleen Kelly of PUC's Finance Bureau advises that it 
would be appropriate to retain the $3.1 million of Bridge Toll 
Funds rather than $3,132,070 reflected in the current budget, 
and $51.6 million of regional funds rather than $51,578,893 in 
the proposed resolution since the specific amounts may 
change slightly when the PUC submits its finalized amounts 
in claims to the MTC. 

4. According to PUC, the $64,000 in Section 8 Planning funds 
will be spent for preparing MUNI's annual short-range 
transit plan (SRTP). 

5. Ms. Kelly reports that the proposed FY 1992-93 figures 
provided in the proposed resolution are preliminary 
amounts, pending the provision of finalized amounts by MTC 
at approximately the end of August, 1992. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to authorize the PUC to apply 
for and accept $51.6 million of regional funds. Approve the 
proposed resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPKRVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item If -File 94-92-5 



Departments: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Municipal Railway (MUNI) 
Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) 

Resolution authorizing the Public Utilities Commission to 
apply for, accept and expend $1,704,000, including an 
estimated $119,280 of indirect costs from 1992-93 State Traffic 
System Management funds for the Municipal Railway and 
also to apply for, accept and expend available Federal 
Petroleum Violation Escrow Account funds to support signal 
system pre-emption and other energy efficient transportation 
improvements. 

$1,704,000 

Approximately September 1, 1992 through August 31, 1993 

State Traffic System Management Funds and Federal 
Petroleum Violation Escrow Account Funds. 

MUNI Transit Signal Preemption Project 

In April, 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved a resolution 
authorizing the Public Utilities Commission to apply for, 
accept and expend $437,000 from 1991-92 State Traffic System 
Management Funds for the purchase and installation of 
MUNI transit signal preemption equipment (File 94-92-1). 
These funds are to be used for preemption equipment for 
MUNI routes along Mission Street and Ocean Avenue. 

The proposed resolution would authorize the PUC to apply 
for, accept and expend funds to support the continuation of 
the San Francisco Municipal Railway signal preemption 
project, which includes the continued purchase and 
installation of MUNI transit signal preemption equipment, 
and other energy efficient transportation improvements. 
MUNI, in conjunction with the Department of Parking and 
Traffic, have identified 65 additional intersections throughout 
the City as being high priority locations for the preemption 
equipment (see attachment for list of 65 intersections). The 
Department of Parking and Traffic is also involved in this 
project because MUNI and DPT need to coordinate traffic 
signal operations with the transit signal preemption 
equipment. 

Preemption sensing devices would be installed on MUNI 
trolley coach and Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) overhead wires, 
which, when triggered by a passing trolley coach or LRV, 

BOARD OF SljPKKVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Budget 



would trip the traffic controller, causing the traffic signal at 
that intersection to turn green. By minimizing the amount of 
stops the trolley coaches and LRVs would have to make for 
traffic signals at 65 proposed sites, MUNI estimates that 
approximately 75,780 minutes of passenger travel time would 
be saved on an average workday, and approximately 16,248 
trolley coach hours (or an annual savings of $491,664 in 
operating costs) and 2,286 LRV operating hours (or an 
annual savings of $117,203 in operating costs) would be saved 
each year. The PUC reports that operational savings would 
augment other MUNI system service requirements. 

A demonstration project involving the installation of traffic 
signal preemption devices at four intersections in the City, 
was funded by Federal Aid Urban (FAU) monies and has 
been completed with positive results. The pre-emption 
project is now in its second phase, involving the installation 
of the preemption devices at 12 intersections. The proposed 
resolution relates to funding for the continuation of the 
second phase of the project, involving the installation of 
preemption devices at 65 intersections. 

Design and Construction Engineering $272,640 

Material and Installation Contracts 1,312,080 

Indirect Costs (30 percent of $272,640) 81,792 

Project Administration Costs 37.488 

TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $1,704,000 



Required Match: None. 



Indirect Costs: 



Comments: 



$81,792, or 30 percent of Design 
Engineering Costs (see Comment No. 7). 



and Construction 



1. The title of the proposed resolution authorizes the PUC to 
apply for, accept and expend monies from both State Traffic 
Management (TSM) funds and Federal Petroleum Violation 
Escrow Account (PVEA) funds, while the body of the 
proposed resolution authorizes the PUC to apply for, accept 
and expend monies from TSM and/or PVEA funds. Ms. Gail 
Bloom of the PUC Finance Bureau advises that the PUC's 
intent was to get the Board's approval to receive funds from 
either of the two sources. The PUC reports that there is a 
possibility that the State may make available PVEA funds to 
offset decreases in the availability of TSM monies, but that the 
PUC will not receive funding from both TSM and PVEA 
funds. Therefore, for the purposes of clarity, both the title 
and the body of the proposed resolution should be amended to 
authorize the PUC to apply for TSM or PVEA funds. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

2. Since there are two numerical errors in the proposed 
resolution, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
reflect that the budget for this project should include $272,640 
rather than $272,000 for Design and Construction 
Engineering, and $1,312,080 rather than $1,264,820 for 
Material and Installation Contracts. 

3. Mr. Mark Goldstein of PUC's Finance Bureau reports that 
as of the writing of this report, no specific details on 
contractors or the MBE/WBE status of contractors is yet 
available regarding the $1,312,080 for Material and 
Installation Contracts. Mr. Goldstein advises that MUNI's 
Engineering Railway Division and the Department of 
Parking and Traffic are anticipated to conduct the design and 
construction engineering work for this project, which 
constitutes $272,640 or 16 percent of the proposed grant. 

4. Ms. Bloom reports that the PUC cannot apply for funding 
for the project until the State adopts a budget. As of the 
writing of this report, the PUC's best estimate is that the PUC 
will be able to apply for State funding on approximately 
September 1, 1992. The PUC is making this request to the 
Board of Supervisors at this time so as to be prepared and able 
to apply for monies as soon as a State budget is adopted. 
Since contract details are not yet available, including the 
MBE/WBE status of the contractors, the contract amount of 
$1,312,080 should be placed on reserve. 

5. A Summary of Grant Request Form was not yet available. 
A Disability Access Checklist is included in the file. 

6. Attached is a list of the 65 intersections included in this 
project for the installation of preemption devices. 

7. The proposed resolution notes that $119,280 in indirect 
costs and project administration is included in the proposed 
grant. However, Mr. Goldstein advises that indirect costs 
total approximately $81,792 while project administration 
costs total approximately $37,488. Therefore, the proposed 
resolution should be amended to state that the proposed grant 
includes $81,792 in indirect costs. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to authorize the PUC to 
apply for TSM or PVEA funds and correct the numerical 
errors as listed in Comment No. 2 above. 

2. Reserve $1,312,080 pending determination of the 
MBE/WBE status of contractors and Penalization of contract 

cost details. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



3. Amend the proposed resolution to state that the proposed 
grant includes $81,792 in indirect costs. 

4. Approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



PHASE II - PRE-EMPT SITES 
PARALLEL CONGESTION RELIEVERS 



A. 



B. 



INTERSECTION 
LOCATION 



West Portal/Vicente (SS) + 

West Portal/15th Ave.(SS)+ 

Duboce/Sanchez (SS) 

Sacramento/Gough 

Fillmore/Fulton 

Judah/18th Ave. (SS) 

Sutter/Hyde 

Union/Fillmore 

Sutter/Leavenworth 

Church/23rd St. (SS) 

Haight/Steiner 

Sutter/Webster 

Drumm/Sacramento (SS) 

Eddy/Fillmore 

Turk/Divisadero 

Eddy/Laguna 

Eddy/Webster 

Eddy/Polk 

Turk/Broderick 

Turk/Chabot 

Turk/Roselyn 

Turk/Parker 

Turk/Stanyan 

Balboa/6th Ave. 

Balbo/5tb Ave. 

Turk/Arguello 

Turk/Taylor 

Turk/Jones 

Turk/Hyde 

Turk/ Leavenworth 

Balboa/25th Ave. 

Turk/Larkin 

Eddy/Larkin 

Eddy /Leavenworth 

Eddy/Hyde 



Eddy/ Jones 
Eddy/Taylor 
Eddy/Mason 
Eddy/Steiner 



(SS) 



Balboa/15th Ave. (SS) 

Total Weekday Seconds Delay 
Total Weekday Minutes Delay 



AVERAGE 


AVERAGE DAILY 


COLUMN 


DELAY 


PASSENGERS PER 


A x B 


(Sec) 


LOCATION 




10.0 


19,100 


191,000 


10.0 


18,469 


184,690 


10.0 


17,685 


176,850 


14.5 


12,051 


174,739 


10.6 


10,664 


113,038 


10.0 


10,666 


106,660 


15.1 


5,917 


89,346 


9.9 


8,997 


89,070 


14.0 


6,083 


85,162 


10.0 


5,590 


55,900 


4.1 


10,918 


49,763 


7.0 


5,155 


36,085 


10.0 


1,703 


17,030 


9.0 


14,440 


129,960 


9.0 


11,623 


104,607 


9.0 


6,664 


59,976 


9.0 


6,370 


57,330 


9.0 


6,346 


57,114 


9.0 


5,304 


47,736 


9.0 


5,063 


45,567 


9.0 


5,063 


45,909 


9.0 


5,027 


45,243 


9.0 


4,974 


44,766 


9.0 


4,654 


41,886 


9.0 


4,700 


42,300 


9.0 


5,440 


48,960 


9.0 


3,397 


30,573 


9.0 


3,365 


30,285 


9.0 


3,365 


30,285 


9.0 


3,344 


30,096 


9.0 


3,329 


29,961 


9.0 


3,278 


29,502 


9.0 


3,053 


27,477 


9.0 


3,019 


27,171 


9.0 


3,011 


27,099 


9.0 


2,983 


26,847 


9.0 


2,870 


25,830 


9.0 


2,699 


24,291 


10.0 


5,881 


58,810 


10.0 


4, 159 


41.590 

2,575,511 
42,925 



(SS) 



Stop-Sign Controlled Intersection 



0' p/JDI. 



Attachment 1 



COKTINUATIOH OF PHASE II 

PRIORITY INTERSECTIONS 

LOCATED ON PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS PER 

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES 



A. 



RANK 


INTERSECTION 


ORDER 


LOCATION 


1. 


Mission/Highland 


2. 


Mission/Trumbull 


3. 


Miss ion/ Silver 


4. 


Miss ion/ Excelsior 


5. 


Mission/Brazil 


6. 


Mission/Persia 


7. 


Mission/Ocean 


8. 


Mission/Onondaga 


9. 


Miss ion/ Italy 


10. 


16th St/Dolores 


11. 


16th St/Guerrero 


12. 


16th St/Valencia 


13. 


16th St/Folsom 


14. 


16th St/S.Van Ness 


15. 


16th St/Harrison 


16. 


Fulton/ St any an 


17. 


Fulton/Arguello 


18. 


16th St/Bryant 


19. 


Fulton/6th Ave 


20. 


16th St/Potrero 


21. 


Fulton/ 8th Ave 


22. 


Fulton/Parker 


23. 


Fulton/ 10th Ave 


24. 


Fulton/25th Ave 


25. 


San Jose/Santa Rosa 



Daily Time Savings: 



AVERAGE AVERAGE DAILY 


COLUMN 


DELAY 


PASSENGER 


LOAD 


A X B 


(Sec.) 


PER LOCATION 




9.0 


18,271 




164,439 


9.0 


17,067 




153,603 


9.0 


16,088 




144,792 


9.0 


14,870 




133,830 


9.0 


14,174 




127,566 


9.0 


10,885 




97,965 


9.0 


10,855 




97,695 


9.0 


10,449 




94,041 


9.0 


9,918 




89,262 


9.0 


8,580 




77,220 


9.0 


8,540 




76,860 


9.0 


8,021 




72,189 


9.0 


7,188 




64,692 


9.0 


6,933 




62,397 


9.0 


6,777 




60,993 


9.0 


6,639 




59,751 


9.0 


6,450 




58,050 


9.0 


6,024 




54,216 


9.0 


5,796 




52,164 


9.0 


5,272 




47,448 


9.0 


5,094 




45,846 


9.0 


4,671 




42,039 


9.0 


4,467 




40,203 


9.0 


3,062 




27,558 


9.0 


2,988 




26,892 


Total 


seconds delay 




1,971,300 


Total 


minutes delay 




32,855 


Total 


hours delay 




548 



0084p/JDL 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item le - File 146-92-29 



Department: 
Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Grant Period: 
Description: 



Project Budget: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
Community Public Health Services (CPHS) 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health, 
Community Public Health Services, Special Programs for 
Youth, as a sub-grantee, in collaboration with Northern 
California Pediatric AIDS Treatment Center as prime 
grantee, to accept and expend the continuation of Federal 
grant funding, which includes indirect costs in the amount 
of $11,659 based on five percent of the total direct grant funds 
and to establish clinical trial subunits and health services for 
youth. 

$244,840 

National Institute of Health's National Institute of Allergy 
and Infectious Disease 

September 1, 1992 through August 31, 1993 

This would be the second year of funding for this project. The 
proposed grant funds would be used for the recruitment and 
retention of youth 13 to 21 years of age to provide improved 
treatment and to evaluate the applicability of adult and 
pediatric research findings. The objectives of the program 
are to provide prevention to high-risk youth, provide 
increased counseling tests at community-based primary care 
clinics serving youth, recruit a minimum of 16 youth into 
clinical trials for providing education, and quality clinical 
research and medical care for HIV-infected youth, and to 
evaluate the effectiveness of recruitment strategies. 

The DPH reports that due to the lack of research on the youth 
population, the DPH's data available is very limited. The 
DPH also reports that there are still many unanswered 
questions about the manner in which the disease affects 
youth as compared with adults and children. Therefore, the 
establishment of clinical trial subunits would allow DPH to 
deliver improved treatment to youth, and to evaluate the 
applicability of adult research findings on youth. 



Personnel FTE 

Project Coordinator (Co-Director) 
Psychiatric Social Worker 
Peer/Client Advocate 
Management Assistant 
Fringe Benefits 
Total Personnel 3.8 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



1.0 


$62,311 


1.0 


44,858 


1.0 


27,700 


0.8 


34,828 




42.424 



$212,121 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Supplies $5,626 

Travel 7,074 

Other Expenses 8.360 

Total Direct Costs $233,181 
Indirect Costs @ 5% of Direct Costs 11. 659 

Total Project budget $244,840 

Indirect Costs: $11,659, or five percent of the $233,181 in directs costs. The 

prime grantee, the Northern California Pediatric AIDS 
Treatment Center's policy is to include only five percent of the 
subgrantees' total direct costs to be used for indirect costs. 

Local Match: None. 

Comments: 1. DPH reports that if the grant funds are reduced or 

terminated then the grant-funded positions would be 
similarly reduced or terminated. As noted above, the 
proposed grant award would fund a total of 3.80 FTEs. 

2. The $5,626 budgeted for "Supplies" would be used to 
purchase four new desks, chairs, lamps, bookcases, health 
education materials, brochures, posters, and materials for 
training manuals for community providers and project staff. 

3. The $7,074 budgeted for "Travel" would be used for six 
trips to the National Institute of Health's AIDS Clinical Trial 
Unit (ACTU) meetings for the Director and Co-Director on 
the project. The Director's position is in the DPH's FY 1992- 
93 budget, funded through the General Fund as Director for 
Special Program for Youth, and therefore is not part of the 
above-listed budget. As noted, the Co-Director on the project 
is the Project Coordinator. Each trip is estimated to cost 
$1,179 and would be to the National Institute of Health in 
Be'thesda, Maryland. 

4. The $8,360 budgeted for "Other Expenses" would be used 
for taxi and food vouchers ($30 per visit) for approximately 192 
visits annually (12 visits per year for 16 youth) to assist the 
youth in getting to their destinations for clinical trials, and 
for books and subscriptions, phone installation and postage. 

5. The DPH reports that the prime grantee, the Northern 
California Pediatric AIDS Treatment Center did not require 
the DPH to submit an application for the proposed grant 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



funds. Therefore, the DPH is not requesting authorization to 
apply for the proposed grant funds. 

6. The proposed grant of $244,840 is $23,403 greater than the 
FY 1991-92 grant of $221,437. 

7. The DPH has completed a Disability Access Checklist 
which is in the file. 

8. Attached is the "Summary of Grant Request" as completed 
by the DPH. 



Recommendation; Approve the proposed resolution. 



HOARD OF SUPKKV1SPHS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Ltf-fl lin vA'Mi nn^ii'ii - L^ ui'iiiii i i' \n VTitiiu ixealu^u. 



,ior 
, I :i c I 



NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PEDIATRIC AIDS 

TREATMENT CENTER (via NIAID) Division CPHS 



Person Diane Wara, M.D. Section SPECIAL PROGRAMS FOR YOUTH 

/dress De pt. of Pediatrics, Noffitt Ho spital Contact Person Anne Marie Benedicto 

University of California, San Fr anciscoreic phone (415) 753-7778 

Amount Requested S 244,840 Application Deadlines/A 

Term: From O^ 01 " 92 To 08-31-93 Notification Expected 

llcnlth Commission . Doard of Supervisors: Finaoce Committee 

Full Doard 



T. Item Description; Request to (apply for) (accept and expend) a (new) (continuation) (allocation) (augmentation lo a) 
(cwt .rr^A- -- *) gTam m lhc amount of S 244,840 from the period of 09-01-92 , 08-31-93 

to pmvirfr. clinical trials for HIV positive youth and young adul t^.;,.,,,. 

C [) ff) fp J j irYS ( C««tJrVhi*w»y: o*^4 »eldrcw-*xi; numWi ♦ crovfT- •^r^cA; «cr»icu m*d prTr— idem ) 

During 1991-92, SPY staff saw over 3500 clients. Available data indicates that increa - 
sed counseling and testing will result in the identification or significant numbers of 
HIV+ youth. With NIH funding available through Northern California Pediatric aids 
Treatment Center, SPY will establish clinical trials subunits for youth to provide 
im proved treatment and to evaluate the applicability of adult research findings. 

TTI. Outcomes/Objectives: 

To recruit and retain a minimum of 16 youth into clinical trials by providing educatio n; 
to provide quality clinical research and medical care for HIV-infected youth; and to 
evaluate the effectiveness of recruitment strategies, new protocol designs, etc. 

TV. Effects of Reduction or Termination of These Funds; 
Funding for the registered nurse (Project coordinator), the psychitric social worker, 

the peer/client advocate and the part-time management assistant positions will be 

absorbed into the existing subunits and/or assumed by alternative funding sources. 

V. Financial Information: 

Col. A Col. R Col. C Col. D Reg. Match Approved hv 

Two Years Ago Past Year/Orig- Proposed Change. 

Grant Amount N/A 221,437 244,840 +23,403 

Personnel 191,680 212,121 +20,441 

Equipment . 

•Contract Svc. 



Mat. & Supp. . 3,778 5,626 + 1,848 

Facilities/Space 



Other 15,434 15,434 



Indirect Costs 10,545 11,659 + 1,114 

VI. Put? p r oce<M"° 

tc.»;~w.^) N/A N/A N/A N/ A 

V II. Personnel 

F/T CSC 1-0 3.0 



!7T CSC 1.3 0.8 

Contractual 



Source(s) of non-grant funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this grant 



ill grant funded empfo\ccs be retained niter this grant terminates? If so, How? 

3 roject employees will be absorbed into the pediatric and adult subunits upon terminati on 
?f the funding. 

HHL Contractual ^rr v irr*; Open Bid Sole Source (it .»<.<..,<*.. t .,is,<i».c i<-rF-._-^- r , m r..,-,) 



22 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item lh - File 146-92-50 



Department: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 



Source of Grant: 



Grant Period: 



Project: 

Project Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
AIDS Office 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health, 
AIDS Office, to accept and expend a supplemental State 
allocation to continue funding the AIDS Drug Program; 
providing for ratification of action previously taken. 

$150,000 

California State Department of Health Services 

April 1, 1992 through September 30, 1992 

AIDS Drug Program 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved a resolution 
(File 146-91-79) which authorized the Department of Public 
Health (DPH) to accept and expend a continuing allocation 
for the purchase of azidothymidine (AZT) and aerosolized 
pentamidine to low-income persons who are ineligible to 
receive MediCal, for July 1, 1992 through March 31, 1992. 
The original grant in the amount of $1,450,000 provided 
approximately 944 prescription per month for nine months, 
or a total of 8,496 prescriptions, at a cost of approximately 
$170 for each prescription. The proposed supplemental 
funding in the amount of $150,000 would continue to provide 
azidothymidine (AZT) and aerosolized pentamidine for an 
additional six month period, which began on April 1, 1992 
through September 30, 1992 (See Comment #1). Under the 
proposed supplemental grant, a total of approximately 147 
prescriptions would be provided per month for six months, 
for a total of approximately 882 prescriptions, at a cost of 
approximately $170 for each prescription. 

Recipients who are eligible for these AIDS drugs must have 
a valid prescription from a licensed physician and must 
meet income eligibility criteria. The program would be 
administered by the AIDS Office and services would be 
provided by the Department of Pharmaceutical Services at 
San Francisco General Hospital. 



No. of Persons 
to be Served: 



Grant Budget: 



Approximately 147 prescriptions filled per month lor six 
months 

The entire grant amount is to be expended on AZT ami 
aerosolized pentamidine 

BOARD OF SUPKKVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

23 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Local Match: 
Indirect Costs: 
Comments: 



Recommendation: 



None 

Not allowed by the funder (See Comment #3). 

1. As noted above, the proposed resolution would provide for 
ratification of action previously taken. The DPH reports 
that expenses have been incurred against this award prior 
to approval of the full Board of Supervisors because of the 
late notification by the California State Department of 
Health Services that a supplemental allocation was being 
made to the DPH program. 

2. The DPH was notified that the proposed supplemental 
funding was available to extend the AIDS drug program for 
six months, and therefore, the DPH did not have to apply for 
the proposed supplemental funds. 

3. Although the body of the proposed resolution indicates 
that indirect costs are not allowed by the funder, the title of 
the proposed resolution should be amended to also indicate 
that the funder does not allow indirect costs and 
authorizing a waiver of indirect costs. 

4. The DPH has submitted a Disability Access Checklist, 
which is in the file. 

5. A Summary of Grant Request, as prepared by the DPH, 
is attached. 

Amend the title of the proposed resolution to indicate that 
indirect costs are not allowed by the funder and authorizing 
a waiver of indirect costs. Approve the proposed resolution 
as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

24 



Health Commission - Summary of Grant Recme^t Rev. 4/10/90 

Department of Health Services 
Office of AIDS 



G ran tor 

Contact Person Anna Ramirez 

Address P.O. Box 942732 



Division 
Section 



f.n/ATDS Div. 
AIDS Office 



Sacramento, CA 94234-7320 

Amount Requested 5 150,000 

Term: From 



4/1/92 



To 9/30/92 



Contact Person 

Telephone 

Application Deadline 
Notification Expected 



Tim Piland 



554-9132 



n/a 



Health Commission 



I. Item Description: 



TT Siimmir' 



6/16/92 



Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 
Full Board 



Reauest 10 (epptyxfej^ (accept, and expend) a {now) (continuation) (allocation) (esEHKnasBrxxxao) 

grant, in the amoum ofS 150,000 from the period of 4/1/92 to 9/30/92 

to nrrsvirie supplemental funding to AIDS Drug Program services 



This program continues to provide AIDS-related drugs to non-MediCal-eligible, low-i ncome 

persons who have a valid prescription from a licensed physician and who meet the in come 

eligibility criteria; program is adminstered by AIDS Office and service provision i s at 

San Francisco General Hospital pharmacy [Plans for the program include a decentrali zation 

through contracting with a non-profit provider to increase utilization and make dru gs 

TTT _ . ,„,. .. more easily available to program participants.] 

III. Outcnmes/Qhiecti ves: ■* v ° v r 

These funds will supplement the latest amendment to the Standard Agreement (whose te rm 

began 1/1/90) for the six-month period from 4/1/92 through 9/30/92; with this suppl emental 

funding and "rollover" from the previous ninfc-month amendment, the program will be su pported 



TV. Effect* "f Rechtcti"" "r Termination of Th?<e Fund' 



through 9/30/92. 



Failure to accept and expend these AIDS Drug Program funds would eliminate this prog ram. 



Financial Information: 



Col. 



Col. B 



Col. C 



Col. D 
Change 



Reo. Match 



Approved bv 



Two Yc-us Ago Past Ycar/Orig. • Proposed 

Grant Amount 4,206,156 1,450,000 1,600,000 '+150,000 

Personnel . . j^ 

Equipment 

"Contract Svc. 



In di rect costs not allowed b y funder 



Mat. & Supp. 4,206,156 1,450,000 . 1,600,000 +150,000 

Facilities/Space 

Other 

Indirect Costs 

VT. Pat? Procr«ino 
VTI, Prr^npnol 

F/T CSC 

P/T CSC 

Con trac tual 



Source(s) of non-grant funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this grant: 
None . 

Will grant funded employees be retained after this grant terminates? If so, How? 

No. 



\ iVUl_CnnJ 



ua I Service**: Open Bid 



Sole Source 






These funds will continue to support activities -it San Fran< rtera] Hospital 

pharmacy ; future plans call Eoi -\ decentralization through non-profit cont ractor. 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Item li- File 146-92-51 



Department: 



Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Grant: 
Term: 
Project: 
Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
AIDS Office 

Resolution authorizing DPH to accept and expend the 
continuation of State grant funding not to exceed $2,615,796 
for the Master Grant Agreement which includes indirect 
costs in the amount of $75,322 based on ten percent of 
personnel costs, and to provide for ratification of action 
previously taken. 

Not to exceed $2,615,796 

State Department of Health Services, Office of AIDS 

July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Master Grant Agreement 

The proposed State grant funds would provide for the third 
year funding of a Master Grant Agreement between the State 
Office of AIDS and DPH. The Master Grant Agreement was 
established by the State Office of AIDS in February 1989 to 
consolidate the City's various AIDS-related programs. The 
programs which are now under this umbrella agreement 
were previously funded independently through the State 
Office of AIDS. 

Under the Master Grant Agreement, the proposed grant 
funds would provide for the following six programs: (1) 
Alternative Test Sites; (2) Early Intervention Program; (3) 
Block Grant Funding; (4) Education and Prevention; (5) Pilot 
Care Projects; and (6) Residential AIDS Shelters. DPH would 
be responsible for administering the grant funds for the six 
programs. The program descriptions and budget details for 
the six programs are as follows: 



Alternative Test Sites 



$581,793 



DPH lab personnel would provide anonymous AIDS antibody 
testing and provide the State Office of AIDS with monthly 
updates regarding test results. DPH would also contract 
with the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), 
AIDS Health Project to provide services such as informing 
test applicants on the test's reliability, pretesting and post- 
testing counseling, some lab testing and making appropriate 
client referrals. The proposed grant funding would provide 
for approximately 1 1,500 AIDS antibody tests. 

BOARD OF SIIPKIU 1SQHS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

!6 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



DPH selected UCSF AIDS Health Project through the 
Department's Request for Proposal process. The proposed 
budget for the Alternative Test Sites program is as follows: 

DPH- Personnel 



Salaries (3.25 FTE) 


$126,449 




Fringe Benefits (@ 26%) 


32,878 




Subtotal Personnel 




$159,327 


Operating Expenses 






Materials/ Supplies 


42,712 




Facilities/ Space 


22,000 




Leasing MIS Services (includes 






computer services to track 






test results) 


16,000 




Travel 


3,500 




Other (telephone, postage, 






reproduction) 


10.500 




Subtotal Operating Expenses 




94,712 


Contractual Services 






UCSF AIDS Health Project 




311,821 


Indirect Costs (10% of DPH Personnel) 


15.933 



Total $581,793 



Early Intervention Program $286£95 

DPH would contract with the Mission Neighborhood Health 
Center for the provision of direct Early Intervention Program 
services. These services would include maximizing the 
health and productivity of HrV positive persons through 
medical evaluations, laboratory monitoring, psychological 
support, case management, follow-up and referral for out of 
clinic services. The proposed grant funding would provide 
services to approximately 200 HIV positive persons. 

DPH would contract with the Mission Neighborhood Health 
Center on a sole source basis, due to the need for continuity 
and the uniqueness of the services provided. The proposed 
budget for the contractual services of the Mission 
Neighborhood Health Center for the Early Intervention 
Program is as follows: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

27 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Mission Neighborhood Health Center 

Personnel 

Salaries (5.55 FTE) $179,120 

Fringe Benefits (25% of Personnel) 46.571 

Subtotal DPH Personnel $225,691 

Contractual Personnel 8,564 



Operating Expenses 






Travel 


3,000 




Other(telephone, postage, office 






supplies, printing.utilities) 


4,742 




Educational Materials/Outreach 


1,284 




Malpractice Insurance 


1,382 




Clinical Supplies 


21.620 




Subtotal Operating Expenses 




32,028 


Indirect Costs at 9% of Personnel 




20.312 



Total $286,595 

Block Grant Funding $545^00 

Under the Block Grant Funding, DPH's AIDS Office would 
provide technical management assistance to a variety of 
AIDS Office programs which receive primarily local and 
Federal funding. This assistance includes allocating funds, 
developing contracts, budget coordination, invoicing 
documents, conducting evaluations and data entry. In 
addition, the funding would provide 3,300 confidential HrV- 
antibody tests by the Public Health lab prescribed by private 
physicians. The proposed budget for the Block Grant 
Funding program is as follows: 

DPH- Technical Assistance 
Administrative Salaries (8.25 FTE)$323,523 
Lab Personnel (3.0 FTE) 96,180 

Fringe Benefits (26% of Personnel) 109.123 
"" Subtotal Personnel $528,826 

Operating Expenses 

Clinical Supplies 16,674 
Indirect Costs * Q 

Total $545,500 



Since the Block Grant Funding involves primarily administrative functions, the State 
OfTice of AIDS does not allow DPH to include indirect costs 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Education and Prevention $675,423 

DPH would provide administrative oversight to direct 
services contracted out through Operation Concern, 18th 
Street Services, Hispanic Headquarters Advertising, City 
Clinic Youth Advocacy Program, and Women's Institute on 
Mental Health. The DPH would coordinate, direct and 
monitor the services for each contractor. The proposed grant 
funded contract programs would provide information and 
education services to approximately 4,400 targeted 
individuals including gay and bisexual males, TV drug 
users, ethnic minorities and health service providers. The 
program services provided would increase the client's 
awareness about AIDS transmission and prevention through 
group and individual AIDS and risk reduction counseling. 
In addition, DPH estimates that a media campaign 
targetting gay and bisexual men of color would reach 
approximately 48,750 individuals. 

Contracts for the Education and Prevention Program for FY 
1992-93 were chosen on a competitive basis. The proposed 
budget for the Education and Prevention program is as 
follows: 

DPH Personnel 

Salaries (3.5 FTE) $155,262 

Fringe Benefits (@ 26%) 40.368 

Subtotal Personnel $195,630 

Contractual Services 

Operation Concern/LYRIC(10 mo s.) 75,000 
18th Street Services (10 mos.) 75,000 

Women's Institute on 

Mental Health 92,293 

Hispanic Headquarters Advertising 73,000 
City Clinic Youth Advocacy Program 

(10 mos.) 111.305 

Subtotal Contractual 426,598 

Operating Expenses 

Facilities Rental 18,875 

Materials and Supplies 3,000 

Health Education Materials 2,000 

Consultants 2,625 

Travel 1,000 

Other (telephone, postage, training) 6.132 

Subtotal Operating Expenses 33,632 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

29 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Indirect Costs (10% of DPH Personnel) 19.563 

Total $675,423 

The proposed budgets for the Education and Prevention 
contractual services, totalling $426,598 are as follows: 

Operation ConcerrVLYRIC 

Personnel 



Salaries (1.75 FTE) ! 


£45,000 




Fringe Benefits (@ 20%) 


9,000 




Subtotal Personnel 




$54,000 


Operating Expenses 






Facilities Rental 


4,096 




Materials and Supplies 


3,500 




Health Education Materials 


1,500 




Travel 


554 




Other (telephone, postage, training) 


3,850 




Subtotal Operating Expenses 




13,500 


Indirect Costs (11% of Direct Costs) 




7,500 


Total 




$75,000 


18th Street Services 






Personnel 






Salaries (2.25 FTE) 


£50,000 




Fringe Benefits (@ 26%) 


13.000 




Subtotal Personnel 




$63,000 


Operating Expenses 






Materials and Supplies 


458 




Property Rental 


2,850 




Health Education Materials 


1,000 




Travel 


285 




Other (telephone, postage, training 


1,107 




courier services, advertising,) 






Subtotal Operating Expenses 




5,700 


Indirect Costs (10% of Personnel ) 




6,300 


Total 




$75,000 



BOAKDOF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

30 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Women's Tnstifiite on Mental Health 



Personnel 






Salaries (2.0 FTE) 


$53,460 




Fringe Benefits (@ 26%) 


13.900 




Subtotal Personnel 




$67,360 


Operating Expenses 






Rental of Facility 


$7,010 




Materials and Supplies 


4,450 




Health Education Materials 


2,505 




Travel 


160 




Other (telephone, postage, training 


3.187 




consultation, utilities) 






Subtotal Operating Expenses 




17,312 


Indirect Costs @ 9.0% of Direct Costs 


7.621 



Total $92,293 

Hispanic Headquarters Advertising 

Personnel 

Salaries (.08 FTE) $6,000 

Fringe Benefits (@ 20%, contributed 

in kind)) 

Subtotal Personnel $6,000 

Operating Expenses 

Consultants (260 hrs @ $25.00 
consult targeted minorities on 
using the media) 6,500 

Media Buying (1,400 Internal Bus 
Cards @ $3.00 each, Radio/Televsion 
spots @ $50-$ 100 each) 58.500 

Subtotal Operating Expenses 65,000 

Indirect Costs( @ 2.8% of Direct Costs) 2.000 

Total $73,000 

Citv Clinic Youth Advocacy Program 

Personnel 

Salaries (2.50 FTE) $70,900 

Fringe Benefits (@ 26%) 18.434 

Subtotal Personnel $89,334 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

31 






Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Operating Expenses 

Materials and Supplies 500 

Health Education Materials 1,000 

Travel 1,000 

Other (telephone, postage, training 10538 
courier services, advertising,) 

Subtotal Operating Expenses 13,038 

Indirect Costs (10% of Personnel) $8.933 

Total $111,305 

Total for Education and Prevention 
Contractual Services $426,598 

Pilot Care Projects $439,707 

For the Pilot Care Projects, DPH would provide direct support 
services to AIDS patients and patients diagnosed with AIDS- 
related complex (ARC). (ARC patients are persons who have 
tested positive for rlPv 1 infection, but who have not been 
completely diagnosed with AIDS.) In addition, the DPH's 
public health nurses would provide case management and 
home and community-based care coordination for people 
with AIDS and ARC. The proposed grant funding would 
provide services to approximately 85 persons with AIDS and 
ARC per month. The proposed budget for the Pilot Care 
Projects is as follows: 

DPH- Personnel 

Salaries (5.5 FTE) $316,078 

Fringe Benefits (@ 26%) 82.180 

Subtotal Personnel $398,258 

Travel (local) 1,623 

Indirect Costs ( 10% of DPH Personnel ) 39.826 

Total $439,707 

Residential AIDS Shelters $86,778 

DPH would contract with Catholic Charities and the Shanti 
Project for provision of direct program services. The two 
contracts with Catholic Charities and the Shanti Project 
would provide housing and food services for persons with 
AIDS, predominantly women and children. These services 
would include providing homes to persons with AIDS where 
they may receive a clean, safe and healthy environment 
throughout the duration of their residence in these shelters. 

BOARD OK SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

32 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Required Match: 



The proposed grant funds would provide approximately 2,730 
single-day slots. According to DPH, these shelters maintain 
a minimum of 70 percent occupancy at all times. 

DPH would contract with Catholic Charities and the Shanti 
Project on a sole source basis, due to the need for continuity 
and the uniqueness of the services provided. The proposed 
individual budgets for the contractual services of Catholic 
Charities and the Shanti Project are as follows: 



Contractual Services - Catholic Charities 

Personnel 

Salaries (1.18 FTE) $34,333 

Fringe Benefits (@ 25%) 8.583 

Subtotal Personnel $42,916 

Catholic Charities Indirect Costs 

(9% of Personnel) 3.862 

Subtotal Catholic Charities $46,778 



Shanti Project 
Personnel 



Salaries (0.4 FTE) $11,817 
Fringe Benefits (@ 23%) 2.718 
Subtotal Personnel 


$14,535 


Operating Expenses 

Rental of Facility 8,065 
Materials 2,401 
Facility Maintenance 4,906 
Utilities 6,457 
Subtotal Operating Expenses 


21,829 


Shanti Indirect Costs (10% of Direct Costs) 


3,636 


Subtotal Shanti Project 


$40,000 


Total Catholic Charities and Shanti Project 


$86,778 


Grand Total for Six Projects 


$2,615,796 


None 


BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 





3GET ANALYST 

33 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Comments: 1 Mr. Tim Piland of the DPH, AIDS Office reports that if 

grant funding were reduced or terminated, personnel would 
be reduced or terminated accordingly. 

2. Attached is the Health Commission's "Summary of Grant 
Request" as prepared by DPH for the State grant fund. 

3. A Disability Access Checklist is located in this file. 

4. Retroactive funding should be provided for in the proposed 
resolution for contractual services because each of the eight 
contractors has been providing services since July 1, 1992. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to provide for retroactive 
funding, and approve as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

V, 



nr,:i!ii v.iiiiii[m>miim - .in niiiijirv m 'tram r^inir.M 



. , Office of AIDS 

r> antor California Dept of Health Servi ces Division - CO/AIDS Div 

Contact^ Person Julie Ayala Section AIDS Office 

Address _ Box 942732 Contact Person Tim Piland 

Sacr^ento, CA 93234-7320 Telephone' 554-9132 

Amount Requested S 2,615, 796 Application Deadline n/a. 

Term: From 7/1/92 T o 6/30/93 Notification Expected n/a 

Health Commission 6/16/92 Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Board 



[ «.ev. 4/ 10/50 | 



T Item Description: Request to £2C<pkpdkx) (accept and expend) a (sawj (continuation) (allocation) ^atKTrKREEBjHXWvSj 
(G-^ .p^<f^ ~*> grant in the amount of S 2. 165.796 from the period of 7/1/92 to 6/30/93 

to provide Master Grant Agreement consolidated funding services. 



TT , Summary; (Coax.'iirav:Md>ii>™!: Lt=i=r » p-ov?. «=-~j: »=»;.=> **i p^v^t, ) 
T he Master Grant Agreement is a funding mechanism used by the California Department of 
Health Services as an umbrella agreement for allocating funding in six different pr ograir 
areas. Attachment I describes the programs funded under each individual component . 



ITT. Outcnmes/Qhiecti ves: 
Please see Attachement I. 



TV. FffeCT<= of R>d\1Ctinn nr Termination nf Thf<e ^n()c- 

The reduction or termination of these funds would seriously undermine the well-bein g 

of persons with AIDS /ARC. 

V. Finsncisl Information: 

Col. A Col. B Cnl. C Col. D Reo. Match Approved bv 

Two Ycirs Ago ?:si Year/Orig. - Proposed Change 

Grant Amount ' 2.790.004 2,787,546 2,615,796 - 171,750 none 

Personnel . 



Equipment P lease see At tachment II. _ 

'Contract Svc. _ 

Mat. & Supp. - _ 

Facilities/Space ' 

Other " 

Indirect Costs 



VT. Data Pro C e<<:in" 

(co«o lnd»-« .b^-c) 

VTT, Personnel 

F/T CSC 27. 15 26.06 

P/T CSC 1 

Contractual 



Source(s) of non-grant funding for salaries of CSC employees -working part-time on this grant: 
Other AIDS Office grant funding. 

W ill grant funded employees be retained after this grant terminates? If so, How? 

No. 

\s - V HT. C"H(r;imial S-rvir«-c- Q pe n Bid Sole Source. [i/«»«»^c=..e.chS=-^.'orE; 

^ Please see Attachment III. 

35 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item li -File 147-92-2.1 



Grant Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Grant Period: 
Description: 



Department: Public Library 

Item: Resolution authorizing the City Librarian to accept and 

expend funds not to exceed $696,579 available through the 
California State Library from Title II of the Library Services 
and Construction Act, which includes indirect costs in the 
amount of $43,997, or five percent of the total grant. 

Not to exceed $696,579 

California State Library 

January, 1993 to April, 1995 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved legislation 
authorizing the Library to apply for the proposed grant funds 
in an amount not to exceed $879,935, (File 147-92-2). The 
Public Library advises that, in the interim, the State has 
notified the Department that the allocation will be in an 
amount not to exceed $696,579 or $183,356 less than the 
original not to exceed amount of $879,935. The Public Library 
advises that the proposed grant funds would be used to 
expand the scope of renovation work for the Mission Branch 
Library to include (1) expansion of the building to the property 
line to provide a 25 percent increase to the public area of the 
Mission Branch and to improve the quality of staff work 
spaces, (2) creation of a single level on the first floor to provide 
an additional enhancement to handicapped accessibility, (3) 
expansion of the Children's Department to provide for a 
reading room area and a separate area for special activities 
and (4) creation of an area for tutoring and public access to 
microcomputer use. 

Comments: 1. The Public Library has requested that the proposed 

legislation be continued to the July 29, 1992 meeting of the 
Finance Committee to allow additional time for the 
Department to provide budget details for the proposed grant 
funds. 

2. The Public Library reports that the reference to $43,997 for 
indirect costs in the title of the proposed legislation is 
incorrect. The correct amount is $34,829 or five percent of the 
total grant amount of $696,599. The Department advises that 
an Amendment to the Whole on the proposed legislation will 
be prepared and submitted to the Hoard of Supervisors prior 
to the July 29, 1992 meeting of the Finance Committee. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Recommendation: Continue the proposed resolution to July 29, 1992, as 
requested by the Department. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

37 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item Ik - File 147-92-4 



Department: 
Item: 



Contract Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Comment: 



Public Library 

Resolution authorizing the execution of a grant contract with 
the California State Library for the award of a grant of 
Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act funds, which 
contract provides for the State to be indemnified and held 
harmless from all claims or damages which may arise in 
relation to the contract. 

$2,484,573 

California State Library 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved legislation 
authorizing the Public Library to apply for, accept and 
expend California Library Construction and Renovation 
Bond Act grant funds in an amount not to exceed $3,100,000 
(File 147-91-5). The Public Library reports that the actual 
grant amount allocated by the State was $2,484,573. These 
grant funds are to be used to expand the scope of work for the 
Chinatown Branch Library which is, according to the 
Library, the City's busiest branch. The City is in the process 
of using 1988 Library Improvement Bond Funds to renovate 
and improve various branch libraries. The City will be using 
the 1988 Library Improvement Bond funds at the Chinatown 
Branch for seismic upgrading, accessibility to the disabled 
and improved electrical wiring. The California Library 
Construction and Renovation Bond Act grant funds will 
allow the Library to double the size of the Chinatown Branch 
Library and significantly improve both public spaces and the 
staff work space, thereby enabling additional services to be 
provided. 

The Public Library advises that the City must enter into the 
proposed grant contract with the State in order to receive the 
$2,484,573 in Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act 
grant funds. 

The Public Library has requested that this item be continued 
to the July 29, 1992 meeting of the Finance Committee in 
order to allow the Department additional time to provide 
budget details on the Chinatown Branch Library renovation 

project. 



Recommendation: 



Continue the proposed resolution to 
requested by the Department. 



1992, as 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

38 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item 11 -File 30-92-7 

Department Department of Public Health (DPH) 

Community Mental Health (CMH) 

Item: Resolution approving the San Francisco City and County 

Performance Contract for mental health services in fiscal 
year 1991-92. 

Description: State Assembly Bill 1288 established the annual County 

Performance Contract as the basis for State reimbursement 
for County mental health services. The Performance 
Contract must be approved by the Board of Supervisors prior 
to its submission to the State. The proposed resolution would 
provide approval of the San Francisco City and County 
Performance Contract for mental health services provided 
during fiscal year 1991-92 (See Comment #1). 

Under the "realignment" legislation approved by the State 
during 1991-92, the performance contract replaces the 
previously required annual County Short Doyle Plan for State 
reimbursement for County mental health services. The DPH 
reports that this new performance contract, which the 
proposed resolution would adopt, requires general 
assurances regarding maintenance of effort, a series of 
administrative assurances regarding County compliance 
with Federal and State regulations, a commitment to 
continue supplying selected client and cost information, 
compliance with basic service delivery principles and 
submissions of documents supporting various State 
regulations. 

Comments: 1. The DPH reports that because the contract document was 

not received from the State until June 2, 1992, the DPH is 
requesting the Board of Supervisors to authorize the 
performance contract for services which have previously 
been provided during FY 1991-92. In addition, according to 
Mr. Larry Doyle of the DPH, the DPH has already received its 
allocation for FY 1991-92 in the amount of $4,174,205. Mr. 
Doyle explains that it is anticipated that for FY 1992-93, the 
performance contract would be submitted to the Board of 
Supervisors prior to receiving the allocation. Mr. Doyle also 
explains that because of delays with the State, the 
performance contract for FY 1991-92 is being submitted to the 
Board of Supervisors after the allocation lias been received, 
and the services have been provided. However, because the 
proposed resolution already indicates that it would provide 
for a performance contract for mental health services in 
fiscal year 1991-92 . the proposed resolution does not have to 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGKT ANALYST 

39 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



be amended to authorize a performance contract for mental 
health services retroactively . 

2. For FY 1990-91, CMH received a total allocation of 
approximately $26.3 million from the State Department of 
Mental Health as Short Doyle revenues. As noted above, the 
allocation which has been received for FY 1991-92 was 
approximately $4.2 million. Mr. Doyle explains that the total 
State allocation received for FY 1991-92 has basically 
remained unchanged. However, the difference of 
approximately $22.1 million was funded through 
realignment revenues rather than Short Doyle funds. 
Realignment revenues are funded through a combination of 
State Vehicle License Fees and a $0.50 sales tax. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

40 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item lm - File 94-92-3 



Department: 
Item: 



Grant Amounts: 



Project Budget 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Resolution to authorize the Public Utilities Commission 
(PUC) to apply for, accept, and expend funds from the 1991-92 
State Proposition 116 Clean Air and Transportation 
Improvement Act funds and funds from local match funds 
such as State Transit Assistance funds, Bridge Toll Net 
Revenues, Regional Measure One Bridge Toll Revenues, 
and/or Bay Area Rapid Transit District funds, Hetch Hetchy 
funds, Transit Impact Development Fees, Transportation 
Sales Tax Revenues, and/or the San Francisco Municipal 
Railway Improvement Corporation funds to provide 
financing including $1,640,169 of estimated indirect costs for 
nine Municipal Railway Capital Projects. 

State Proposition 116 Clean Air and Transportation 

Improvement Act $28,814,387 

Local Match Program Funds 28.814.387 

Total $57,628,774 



Project 



Total 
Project Costs 



1991-92 Request 



Articulated Trolley Coach 

Replacement " $22,726,766 

MUNI Metro Turnback 202,360,764 

Potrero Division 

Rehabilitation 16,185,480 

Geneva/Green Capacity 

Modification 8,232,000 

Misc Rail Maintenance & Repair 

Equipment Acquisition 3,000,000 

Subway Signal System 

Replacement ' m 38,094,724 

MUNI Metro Extension" to 

Sixth Street 52,949,850 

F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO 

PCC Streetcar Rehabilitation 12,217,159 

Rail Replacement 1.000.000 

Totals $356,766,743 



State 
Funds 



$2,354,743 
11,682,282 

1,530,000 

3,000,000 

1,500,000 

6,247,362 

1,500,000 

500,000 
500.000 

$28,814,387 



Local 
Match 



Total 
Request 



$2,354,743 (1) (3) $4,709,486 
11,682,282 (2) 23,364,564 



1,530,000 (3) 

3,000,000 (2) 

1,500,000(2) 

6,247,362 (2) 

1,500,000(2) 

500,000 (2) 
500.000 (2) 
$28,814,387 



3,060,000 

6,000,000 

3,000,000 

12,494,724 

3,000,000 

1,000.000 

1.000.000 

$57,628,774 



(1) Bridge Toll Net and Regional Measure One Bridge Toll Revenues are 
distributed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for transit 
capital projects. 



BOARD OF SUPKKVISOHS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

(2) The local sales tax provides funds to build transportation capital 
improvements, to rehabilitate existing facilities and fund operations of the new 
facilities. The sales tax will generate over $45 million annually over the next 
eighteen (18) years to support transportation needs in the City transportation 
service providers. 

(3) San Francisco Municipal Railway Improvement Corporation (SFMRIC) is 
a nonprofit corporation established in 1969 to provide capital improvement 
funds for the MUNI. SFMRIC has sold tax-exempt bonds to raise capital for 
the purchase of rolling stock and the construction or rehabilitation of facilities. 
At the end of June 1991, the SFMRIC Board had approximately $12 million 
available for Municipal Railway projects. 

Description: Articulated Trolley Coaches Purchase/Replacement ($4,709,486) 
Equipment purchases of up to 35 Trolley Coaches 

This purchase would secure up to 35 new articulated trolley 
coaches and for related spare parts. To assure their 
acquisition by the end of 1993, capital funds should be 
available at this time. The cost estimates are based upon bids 
received by other transit properties and include 7% sales tax, 
inspection, acceptance and delivery costs, spare parts and the 
installation of fareboxes and communication equipment. 

Municipal Railway Metro Turnback ($23^64,564) 

Final Design Engineering/Construction, Including Right-of- 
Way 

This project involves the construction of an underground 
MUNI Metro subway tunnel extension east of the 
BART/MUNI Embarcadero Station and under Justin 
Herman Plaza, coming to grade via portal in the median of a 
rebuilt Embarcadero Boulevard. The project provides for a 
portal between Howard and Folsom Streets, with surface 
tracks extended within the Embarcadero median southward 
to the block between Folsom and Harrison Streets. Tracks for 
train switching would be constructed under the surface of the 
Embarcadero between Market and Howard Streets. 

Potrero Division Rehabilitation ($3,060,000) 
Construction 

The completion of the rehabilitation of the Potrero Trolley 
Coach Division facility is required to provide and 
accommodate an appropriate maintenance and pull-out base 
storage facility for 60 new articulated trolley coaches 
currently in the process of purchase and due for revenue 
service in 1992. These new articulated trolley coaches will: 
(1) enhance service delivery on lines with excessive peak load 
factors and (2) provide accessibility features for mobility 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

hi 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



impaired riders where previously none were available on 
trolley coach lines. 

Geneva and Green Center Capacity Modifications ($6,000,000) 

Final Design Engineering and Construction 

The F-MARKET-EMBARCADERO Streetcar fleet will be 
housed at Geneva Yard. These streetcars are wider and 
taller than the normal Light Rail Vehicles (LRV). In 
addition, these streetcars require trolley wire overhead, 
whereas the current overhead configuration is for 
pantographs used by LRVs. 

Miscellaneous Rail Maintenance and Equipment Acquisition 

($3,000,000) 

Equipment Purchase 

Purchase new and replacement service vehicles for 
continuous operational support for MUNI's maintenance, 
administrative and supervisory functions (see Footnote in 
Comment 3) These vehicles will be used for the MUNI Metro, 
Trolley Bus and Cable Car systems used to repair and 
refurbish components of MUNI's various fixed guide way 
systems. 

Subway Signal System Replacement ($12,494,724) 

Final Design Engineering 

This project would enable MUNI to modernize the signal 
system in the MUNI Metro subway with a system that 
provides greater safety and allows for closer headways. 
Project design was initiated in 1988 with local resources. 
Subsequent phases involve the installation of on-board and 
wayside computers and an upgraded central control 
computer. 

MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street ($3,000,000) 

Final Design Engineering 

This project will extend the MUNI Metro light-rail system 
from the proposed terminus at Harrison Street on the 
Embarcadero initially south to Sixth Street. The extension, a 
1.8 mile double-track, would run between a relocated MUNI 
Metro Turnback on the Embarcadero to the Caltrain depot 
with an adjoining terminal at Sixth Street. This stop lies 
within the proposed Mission Bay project area. The trackway 
would follow an alignment in the median of a rebuilt 
Kmbarcadero Boulevard to the median of King Street rebuilt 
as a boulevard leading to and from the new 1-280 on and oil 
ramps. It would include four new at-grade stations within 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

43 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

the Embarcadero and King Boulevard medians at the 
probable locations at Hills Plaza/Rincon Hill, 
Townsend/Embarcadero, Second/King Street and 
Fourth/King Streets (Caltrain Depot). 

F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC Streetcar Rehabilitation 
($1,000,000) 

Equipment Rehabilitation 

This project will support the initial service on the proposed F- 
MARKET EMBARCADERO line with the rehabilitation of 18 
Presidential Conference Cars (PCCs), the vintage green 
streetcars used on Market Street prior to the undergrounding 
and the replacement of that streetcar system with the current 
Light Rail Vehicles (LRVs). This project will be followed by a 
second group of eight (8) additional rehabilitated PCCs, as 
required by increments in service. The PCCs will be 
purchased from Southeast Pennsylvania Transit Authority 
(SEPTA) for rehabilitation by MUNI. The additional eight 
cars will be rehabilitated in 1995, pending ridership 
requirements. 

Rail Replacement ($1,000,000) 

Preliminary and Final Design Engineering and Construction 

This project will replace worn rails with special work in 
several locations throughout the Municipal Railway system. 

Comments: 1. The $356,766,743 total 1991-92 cost of the nine (9) projects, 

including the $57,628,774 identified in this legislation is 
divided equally between State Proposition 116 Clean Air and 
Transportation Improvement Act funds and local match 
funds as identified above. However, a portion of the local 
match totaling $24,929,644, which is from sales tax revenues, 
has already been approved by the Transportation Authority 
as provided for with the passage of Proposition B. Therefore, 
the subject resolution should be amended to reduce the 
amount of the local share by $24,929,644, from $28,814,387 to 
$3,884,743, as follows: 

Local Match Funds Subject to Board of Supervisors Approval: 
Articulated Trolley Coach Replacement $2,354,743 
Potrero Division Rehabilitation 1.530.000 

Subtotal $3,884,743 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

44 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Local Match Funds Not Subject to Board of Supervisors Approval: 
MUNI Metro Turnback $11,682,282 

Geneva/Green Capacity Modification 3,000,000 

Misc Rail Maintenance & Repair Equipment 



Acquisition 


1,500,000 




Subway Signal System Replacement 


6,247,362 




MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 


1,500,000 




F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC 






Streetcar Rehabilitation 


500,000 




Rail Replacement 


500.000 




Subtotal 




$24,929,644 


Total Local Share 




$28,814,387 



2. Therefore the total amount of funds subject to this 
legislation is $32,699,130, $28,814,387 in State Proposition 116 
Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act funds and 
$3,884,743 in local match consisting of Bridge Toll revenues 
and San Francisco Municipal Railway Improvement 
Corporation (SFMRIC) funds. 

3. The total of $32,699,130 in State and local match funds is 
divided into six phases among the nine projects as follows: 

In-House Project Engineering 

Articulated Trolley Coach Replacement $271,702 

MUNI Metro Turnback 365,071 

Potrero Division Rehabilitation 318,138 

Geneva/Green Capacity Modification 311,899 
Misc Rail Maintenance & Repair Equipment Acquisition 147,115 

Subway Signal System Replacement 1,201,416 

MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 140,625 

F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC Streetcar Rehab. 28,845 

Rail Replacement 312.500 



$3,097,311 



Professional Services 

Articulated Trolley Coach Replacement 353,212 

MUNI Metro Turnback 

Contractor: BecR'tel/Sedgwick/James 1,752,342 

MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 

Contractor: Forster Jordan 75,000 

F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC Streetcar Rehab. 

Contractor: Wong 37.500 



2,218,054 



BOARD OK SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Construction 

MUNI Metro Turnback $9,345,825 

Potrero Division Rehabilitation 

Contractor: Barnes 2,295,000 

Geneva/Green Capacity Modification 2,250,000 

Subway Signal System Replacement 

Contractor: Alcatel 4,685,522 

MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 1.200.000 



$19,776,347 



Equipment Purchase and Rehabilitation 

Articulated Trolley Coach Replacement $4,003,064 

Misc Rail Maintenance & Repair Equipment Acq. * 1,275,000 

F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC Streetcar Rehab. 

Contractor: Morrison Knudsen 425.000 

5,703,064 
* Partial purchases of a rail grinder ($625,000) a tunnel washer 
($400,000) high-rail lift truck ($64,500) digger-boom ($61,500), line 
truct ($90,000) and 10-wheel flat bed truck ($34,000). This totals 
$1,275,000. The balance from the $3,000,000 request as reflected in 
this resolution as has been provided from previously approved sales 
tax revenues. 

Indirect Costs 

Articulated Trolley Coach Replacement $81,510 

MUNI Metro Turnback 219,042 

Potrero Division Rehabilitation 446,862 

Geneva/Green Capacity Modification 438,101 

Misc Rail Maintenance & Repair Equipment Acquisition 77,885 
Subway Signal System Replacement 360,425 

MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 84,375 

F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC Streetcar Rehabilitation 8,654 
Rail Replacement 187.500 

1.904.354 

Total $32,699,130 

4. Ms. Gail Bloom of the PUC Finance Bureau advises that 
the PUC has not begun their process to develop a Request for 
Proposal (RFP) for certain project phases including 
Professional Services, Construction and Equipment 
Purchase totaling $16,975,495 for the following: 

Professional Services 

Articulated Trolley Coaches Purchase/ Replacement $176,606 

Subtotal $176,606 

Construction 

Municipal Railway Metro Turnback $9,345,825 

Geneva/Green Capacity Modification 2,250,000 

MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 1.200.000 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

46 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Subtotal 

Equipment Purchase 

Articulated Trolley Coaches Purchase/Replacement 
Subtotal 

Total 



$4.003.064 



$12,795,825 

4.003.064 
$16,975,495 



5. Ms. Bloom also advises that the current MBE/WBE/LBE 
goal for MUNI capital projects for FY 1991-92 is 32 percent 
and, through the second quarter, the actual amount in 
MBE/WBE/LBE contracts is 31 percent, one percent lower 
than their stated goal. 

6. The subject resolution title includes the phrase "to provide 
financing including $1,640,169 of estimated indirect costs" 
which is not also stated in the resolve portion of the 
resolution. The body of the proposed resolution should be 
amended to increase the amount of the indirect cost by 
$264,185 from $1,640,169 to $1,904,354 because no indirect cost 
for the local share was included. This additional amount is 
the indirect cost portion of the revised local share total of 
$3,884,743 identified in Comment 1. 

Recommendation: Amend the subject resolution as follows: 

Page 1, Line 5, change $28,814,387 to $3,884,743; 

Page 1, Line 6, change $1,640,169 to $1,904,354; 

Page 4, Line 5, change $28,814,387 to $3,884,743; 

Page 4, Line 9, add after "projects" the following phrase, "to 
provide financing including $1,904,354 of estimated indirect 
costs for nine Municipal Railway capital projects." 

Reserve $17,152,101 for professional services ($353,212), for 
construction ($12,795,825) and for equipment purchase 
($4,003,064) as identified in Comment 4 above. 

Approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BU1X JET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item In - File 146-92-21.1 



Department: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 

Bureau of Toxics, Health and Safety Services 

Port of San Francisco, Regulatory and Environmental 

Services Section 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health, 
Bureau of Toxics, Health and Safety Services, to accept and 
expend a grant of $49,950, which includes indirect costs of 
$3,800, based on 20 percent of DPH salaries, from the 
California Department of Fish and Game, for the 
development of the San Francisco Oil Spill Prevention and 
Response Plan. 

$49350 

June 1, 1992 to December 1, 1993 (18 months) 

California Department of Fish and Game, Office of Oil Spill 
Prevention and Response 

Oil Spill Prevention and Response Plan for San Francisco 

In April, 1992, the Board of Supervisors authorized the 
Department of Public Health, Bureau of Toxics, Health and 
Safety Services, to apply for a new grant of $50,000, including 
indirect costs of $5,000, from the California Department of 
Fish and Game to develop an oil spill prevention and 
response plan for San Francisco (File 146-92-21). 

In the interim, the Department of Fish and Game notified the 
DPH that the DPH would be eligible to receive a grant of 
$49,950 for the development of such a plan. Therefore, the 
DPH is now requesting that the Board of Supervisors 
authorize the DPH to accept and expend a grant of $49,950 for 
this purpose. 

The proposed grant of $49,950 will provide funding for DPH 
aria' Port Commission staff to develop such a prevention and 
response plan, which will delineate response actions, 
notifications and command centers and identify sites within 
San Francisco which are vulnerable to oil spills. 

The DPH advises that the plan would assist the City in 
coordinating oil spill response efforts with the State 
Department of Fish and Game and the U. S. Coast Guard, 
who have primary responsibility for oil spills. The plan 
would follow the same format as the City's Area Plan for 
Hazardous Materials. 

BOARD OK SlU'KUVISPRS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

48 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Budget: 



The DPH reports that the plan would be jointly drafted by the 
DPH, Bureau of Toxics, Health, and Safety Services and the 
Port's Regulatory and Environmental Services Section. 

Personnel Salaries 

DPH Project Director 

500 hours @ $35/hour $17,500 

DPH Clerical Staff 

100 hours @ $15/hour $ 1,500 

Port of San Francisco 

Sr. Industrial Hygienist 

350 hours @ $35/hour $12.250 






Subtotal Salaries 




$31,250 


Fringe Benefits (28%) 




8.750 


Total Personnel Costs 




$40,000 


Office Supplies 


1,650 




Printing & Duplication 


500 




Travel (Required by Grant) 


1,000 




Overhead (Rent, Utilities, Etc.) 


2,500 




Telephone 


400 




Postage 


100 




Indirect Costs 


3,800 




Total Operating Expenses 




9.950 



TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 



$49,950 



Required Match: 
Indirect Costs: 

Comments: 



None. 

$3,800, or 20 percent of DPH salaries. 

1. It was originally planned that the proposed grant would 
commence on June 1, 1992, but the DPH did not request 
authorization to accept and expend the grant until June 15, 
1992. Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended 
to authorize the DPH to retroactively accept and expend the 
proposed grant commencing June 1, 1992. 

To date, no work has been done on the grant, but the contract 
which was signed between the DPH and the California 
Department of Fish and Game states that the term of the 
contract will be June 1, 1992 to December 1, 1993. 

2. Mr. Richard Lee of the DPH advises that travel is required 
to consult with the California Department of Fish and Game 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

49 






Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

and with the Coast Guard while developing the oil spill 
prevention and response plan. 

3. Attached is a copy of the Summary of Grant Request. The 
Summary contains a typographical error in the item 
description, and should state that the grant period is between 
June 1, 1992 and December 1, 1993 rather than December 1, 
1992. 

4. Mr. Lee reports that although most of the work for this 
project will take 6 months to complete, the grant period is 18 
months to ensure that the DPH has sufficient time to 
complete reports required by the California Department of 
Fish and Game. 

5. Mr. Lee reports that no indirect costs are included for Port 
personnel because the Port's staff time will be work ordered 
by the DPH and the indirect costs are primarily borne by the 
DPH, who is administering the grant. 

6. A copy of the Disability Checklist for Grant Applicants is 
included in the file. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to authorize the DPH to 
retroactively accept and expend the grant, commencing June 
1, 1992. Approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPKRVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

50 



Hr CgnunLEsisi! - SmnmzES "f G t Rrrv.ir^t Rev. ~/io/9d. 



Grantor Calif. Depc of Fish: and Game Division Toxics 

Contact Person Linda Harris Section Special Projects 

Address 1416 Ninth St. P.O.;. Box 944209 Contact Prrson Richard Lee 



Telephone 554-2798 



Amount Requested S ^9,950 Application Deadline — 3-31-92 

Term: From 6-1-92 To 12-1-93 Notification Expected 5-1-92 

Health Commission Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Doard 



T. Item r>r*rrlrtion; Request trj (apply for) (accept and expend) a (new) (continuation) (allocation) (augmentation to a) ' 

ie-».«n>^*— «*» grant in the amount of S 49,950 from the period of 6-1-92 to 12-1-92 

to provide services. 

The grant will provide funding for Department of Public Health and Port Commission staf 
to develop an oil-spill prevention and response .plan for San Francisco. The plan -will 
delineate response actions, notifications, command centers and identify vulnerable 
facilities within San Francisco. 

77T- Outcr>mr</Pbirctivf<T 

The plan will help and coordinate response actions in. case of an oil spill, within 
San Francisco and -other agencies. 

TV, ~P,fr»Tt* n£ RaJUCjlgj; nr; T>r„i n ,;; nn n f TS.;. "l'"**: 

Trip City and Countvof San Francisco will not have an oil spill prevention and response 
plan. ._J 

V. Financial Infnrmg tip^: 



Col, j Col. B Col- C • Col. D Hec. M2tch 

T^^oVtirjAjo ?ui Var/On[. proposed Cbinji 

Grz.nt >.aoMt 49,950 

Personnel 40,000 

Equipment 

"Contract Svc. 



MzU Sz Supp. 3,150 

Facilities/Space 3,000 

Other 

Indirect Costs 3,800 

VT. n ?T? P. nr . CI ;. 



VTT. ?-r-<:r.r,r,.) 

Frr CSC 40,000 

P/T CSC 

C o a t r 2 c : u a 1 



Source(s) of dod-t;;: fuadin" lor salaries o', CSC t^alovccs vrorkio" Dar'.-ticae on :b:s 
N/A 



" ill ;.a:; (undid ztz?\o\czs dc rc:;iatd ;Itcr ids ;r:a: :t:rmi = 2tcs? If so, How? 
Using existing Civil Servic e personnel 



^HL_t«m r,r,..,i c.„ 



Solr Source 



51 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item lo - File 146-92-49 



Department: 

Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
Community Public Health Services (CPHS) 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health, 
Community Public Health, Special Projects for Youth as sub- 
grantee in collaboration with Larkin Street Youth Center, as 
prime grantee, to accept and expend a continuation Federal 
grant for comprehensive health care to high risk and HP7 - 
positive youth; and waiving indirect costs. 

$90,466 

August 1, 1992 through July 31, 1993 

U.S. Department of Health Resources and services 
Administration for Community Health Outreach to Youth. 

Project Ahead (Alliance for the Health of Adolescents) 

This would be the third year of funding for a three-year 
project. The proposed grant funds would be used to provide 
health services to high risk youths which would include 
primary medical care, HIV screening and testing, 
counseling, providing physicals, medical treatment, and the 
monitoring of HIV infection management and treatment. 
The goals of the project would include the continued support 
and participation in City-wide collaborative AIDS prevention 
reduction efforts, the development of a community-based, 
family centered coordinated service for very high risk and 
HIV infected adolescents and their families, and the 
development of programs to reduce the spread of HIV 
infection to vulnerable youths through health education 
classes, health care workshops, and a referral system for 
youths. 

The Larkin Street Youth Center is the prime grantee of the 
proposed Federal grant. The DPH would work in 
collaboration with the Larkin Street Youth Center. The 
Larkin Street Youth Center would have the responsibility for 
the administration and coordination of the project. The DPH 
would provide the clinical and administrative supervision for 
the health care services staff located at Larkin Street, and 
provide community health outreach through a licensed 
vocational nurse with a focus on AIDS prevention. The 
Larkin Street Youth Center would receive reimbursement for 
services provided for the project directly from the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services. The DPH, as 



BOARD OF SUPKKVISPRS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

52 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



sub-grantee, would receive reimbursement from the Larkin 
Street Youth Center. 



Required Match: None 



No. of Persons 
Served: 

Indirect Costs: 



Project Budget 



Comments: 



365 high risk or HIV positive youth 

The prime grantee, Larkin Street Youth Services, prohibits 
the use of grant funds for indirect costs. Therefore, the 
proposed resolution would authorize the waiving of indirect 
costs. 



Personnel 

Licensed Vocational Nurse 

Physician Specialist 

Fringe Benefits 

Total Budget 



FTE 
1.00 
0.50 



1.50 



$30,282 
40,951 

19.233 

$90,466 



1. The Department of Public Health reports that if the 
proposed grant funds are reduced or terminated, the grant 
funded positions would be similarly reduced or terminated. 

2. The proposed grant award of $90,466 is $350 greater than 
the FY 1991-92 grant award of $90,116. 

3. Attached is the "Summary of Grant Request" as prepared 
by the DPH. 

4. A Disability Access Checklist is located in this file. 
Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



HOARD OF SI IPKRVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

53 



ili ^ ill h < " < ' , HnM} ^ifla^^iiiiimaaLJiLIir^iLJki m£ ^ 



is 



MATERNAL & CHIL ^EALTH BUR EAU (HRSA) 
Person JEANNE H. CuNELY 

5600 FISHERS LANE, PARKLAWN~BLDG 



Rev. 4/10/90 



CPHS 



SPECIAL PROGRAMS FOR YOUTH 



RM 18-21, ROCKVILLE, MP 20857 

„nt Requested s 90^466.00 

n: From 8/1/92 To 7/31/93 



£ alth Commission 



Division 

S ec I loo 

Contact Person . ANNE MARIE BENEDICT O 

Telephone (415) 753-7759 

Application Deadline 

Notification Expected 



Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 



Full Doard 



c^ZJ:^ " • IZT ^ ****£** ^ «pcnd) 3 M (continuation) ^W^C^.^^^, 
pan, » the amount of S^466_ from Ae period of mm/92__ u 07/31/93 
10 Pnovide, HIV+ or hig h risk youth with p rW^Th^TTh ca^iT^" 21 -^ 

* sen-ices. 



Summary; tc-.^vb^, ^^j^.^,. 

the Pediatric ATDS/HIV Demonstration Grant enters it's hhirrt V o»,---«- 

velop a coord in*r~j ~T ^ m ~ f ,~ uth - cn -T7; u ! . ~ S thlrd yearr lfc con tinu es to 
V antibodX Ui ,1 i .;..!. t "- sensitive resource s for prevention A >dnr^t-r^; 

* y^inan specialist and a Lice nsed Vocatio nal Nurse. 

• Outcome <:/Qblertlvyt - 




Firm, of B rfi. fl l~„ rt Utoml M U aL _i ! LJji Ia _ EluuU; 



int Amount 
son n el 
tlpment 
itract Svc. 
*- & Supp. 

Hlltles/Space 

er 

irect Costs 



TwoYc^iAgo P»nYear/Ori| 

. 69,121 90,116 

69,121 ~907TI6~ 




CSC 
CSC 


1 
.5 


1 


.5 


traclual 





.5 



gW of Don .„ rant (uDdln! , , or saiar . cs of csc ^ 



s «orkin S part-time on this orant: 



H r a n t funded 



employees be retained after this o r , n , , . , ,, 

iois £raot terminalts? If so. Mow'' 

■IX-Qfchgr grant funds aro ,-^in^ 




' " ■■" 



54 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item lp -File 146-92-15.1 

Department 



Item: 



Amount: 



Source of Funds: 



Description; 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
AIDS Office 

Release of reserved funds for two contractors providing 
Treatment Advocacy, Clinical Trials Advocacy, Nutritional 
Counseling, and Detoxification Services for HIV positive 
persons. 

$200,529 

Department of Health and Human Services, Health 
Resources and Services Administration 

The Board of Supervisors previously authorized the 
Department of Public Health (DPH) to accept and expend a 
continuation of the Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS 
Resources Emergency (CARE/Title I Supplemental) Disaster 
Relief Grant of $14,661,192 from the Federal Department of 
Health and Human Services, and reserved a total of 
$1,270,000 pending the selection of contractors, information 
regarding hours and rates, and the MBE/WBE status of the 
contractors, (File 146-92-15). The Ryan White CARE/Title I 
Supplemental Grant provides disaster relief assistance to 
localities that are disproportionately affected by the AIDS 
epidemic. The Grant Funds are divided into specific funding 
priority areas. Of the $1,270,000 reserved, DPH would like to 
release $110,837 for Mission Neighborhood Health Center, 
and $89,692 for Bayview Hunter's Point Foundation (BVHPF) 
to provide services in the funding priority area of Other 
Primary Health Care. 

The Mission Neighborhood Health Center would provide 
three programs. These programs are Treatment Advocacy, 
Clinical Trials Advocacy, and Nutrition Counseling to HIV 
positive clients. 

The Treatment Advocacy program would facilitate the access 
of clients to medical and other supportive services. An 
advocate would be hired to work with clients to reduce 
barriers to service, accompany clients to appointments and 
provide language translation when needed, organize 
confidential house meetings and community outreach 
presentations to recruit clients, and network with HIV 
service coalitions. 

The Clinical Trials Advocacy program would facilitate the 
access of clients to studies examining the use of 
investigational therapeutic drugs for HIV disease. Activities 

HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

55 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



would include informing prospective clients about clinical 
trials, obtaining informed consent and conducting trials 
searches, assisting clients to enroll in trials, follow-up, and 
community provider presentations. 

The Nutrition Counseling program would assist clients to 
maintain or adopt positive dietary practice. A dietitian would 
conduct individual and group nutrition education classes, 
assess client needs related to nutrition, develop a nutrition 
care plan with clients, and refer clients to appropriate 
resources for food and other needs. The Mission 
Neighborhood Health Center would use the requested 
reserved funds for the following: 

Treatment Advocacy 

Personnel 



Salaries (.40 FTE) 


$14,926 




Fringe Benefits @ 25% 


3,732 




Subtotal Personnel 




$18,658 


Operating Expenses 






Medical Information System 


2,000 




Transportation 


1,100 




Other (telephone, postage, training 






utilities, printing) 


1,899 




Educational & Office supplies 


767 




Subtotal Operating Expenses 




5,766 


Indirect Costs (9% of Direct Costs) 




2,198 


Total 


$26,622 


Clinical Trials Advocacv 






Personnel 




- 


Salaries (.60 FTE) 


$22,389 




Fringe Benefits @ 25% 


5,597 




Subtotal Personnel 




27,986 


Operating Expenses 






Medical Information System 


$602 




Transportation 


900 




Educational & Office Supplies 


1,017 




Other (Postage, printing, training, 






utilities, subscriptions) 


1,900 




Subtotal Operating Expenses 




4,419 


Equipment Purchase 




1,398 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

56 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Indirect Costs (9% of Direct Costs) 3.042 

Total $36,845 

Nutrition Counseling 
Personnel 



Salaries (.70 FTE) 


$28,673 




Fringe Benefits @ 25% 


7.168 




Subtotal Personnel 




$35,841 


Operating Expenses 






Medical Information System 


2,000 




Food Supplies 


1,900 




Educational &Office Supplies 


1,006 




Travel 


800 




Other (postage, printing, dues 






utilities, training) 


1.911 




Subtotal Operating Expenses 




7,617 


Indirect Costs (9% of Direct Costs) 




3.912 



Total $47.370 

Total of three programs $110.837 

The BVHPF would augment its current detoxification 
services to HrV positive substance abusers of color with 
traditional Chinese medicine treatments designed to promote 
immune function. The proposed target population is 
currently unable to receive these services. Traditional 
Chinese medicine is a comprehensive approach that includes 
the use of acupuncture, herbs, moxibustion immune 
enhancing visualization massage, traditional Chinese 
breathing techniques (QI Gong) and nutritional changes. 
BVHPF would maintain a commitment to providing 
culturally sensitive services by race, sexual orientation, 
gender, and drug behavior in order to remain accessible to 
individuals who continue to be underserved due to race, 
poverty, substance-abuse, isolation due to self-perceived 
shame of their disease, and lack of awareness about the need 
for early care. BVHPF would use the reserved funds for the 
following: 

Personnel 

Salaries(2.0 FTE) $52,250 

Fringe Benefits @ 21% 10.973 

Subtotal Personnel $63,223 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

57 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Operating Expenditures 






Medical Supplies 


$3,000 




Property Rental 


6,000 




Building Maintenance & Repair 


1,200 




Travel 


450 




Advertising 


300 




Other (insurance, postage, printing 






advertising, utilities) 


6,913 




Office Supplies 


1,200 




Subtotal Operating Expenses 




$19,063 


Indirect Cost @ 9% of Direct Costs 




7,406 



Total 



$89,692 



Comments: 1. Mr. Tim Piland at the AIDS Office reports that both the 

Mission Neighborhood Health Center and the BVHPF are 
non-profit organizations. 

2. Mr. Piland reports that DPH selected the contractor, 
Mission Neighborhood Health Center, under a Request for 
Proposal (RFP) process. The Mission Neighborhood Health 
Center was one of 2 respondents and was selected because of 
their overall viability to perform the necessary services. The 
Mission Neighborhood Health Center would provide 
contractual services from approximately July 1, 1992 through 
June 30, 1993. It is anticipated that 240 clients will be served 
through the Treatment Advocacy, Clinical Trials Advocacy, 
and Nutrition Counseling programs. 

3. Mr. Piland reports that DPH selected the contractor, 
BVHPF, under a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. The 
BVHPF was one of 2 respondents and was selected because of 
their overall viability to perform the necessary service. The 
BVHPF would provide contractual services from 
approximately July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. It is 
anticipated that 7,350 clients will be served through the 
program. 

4. DPH reports that the Mission Neighborhood Health Center 
would purchase two WYSE computer terminals to be used to 
enter and maintain computerized data. The amount of $1,398 
would include the cost of the purchase of the computers, 
installation and maintenance fees. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed release of reserve. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

58 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Item 2 - File 25-92-22 
Note: 

Department 
Item: 



Services to 
be Performed: 



Description: 



This item was continued from the July 8, 1992 Finance 
Committee Meeting. 

Police Department 

Resolution concurring with the Controller's Certification of 
Costs required by Charter Section 8.300-1 (Proposition J) that 
certain services can continue to be practically performed by a 
private contractor for a lower cost than similar services 
performed by the City and County of San Francisco. 



Janitorial Services for all nine District Police stations, the 
Police Academy, the Pistol Range, and the Golden Gate 
stables. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for these 
janitorial services in fiscal year 1992-99 would result in 
estimated savings as follows: 





Lowest 


Highest 




Salary 


Salary 


Citv Operated Service Costs 


Step 


Step 


Salary 


$257,920 


$311,791 


Holiday Pay 


58,032 


70,153 


Night Duty 


4,127 


4,989 


Fringe Benefits 


89,654 


103,527 


Non-Labor Costs 


35,000 


35,000 


DPW Overhead 


429.034 


506.911 


Total 


$873,767 


$1,032,371 


Contracted Service Cost 


377.196 


377.196 


Estimated Savings 


$496,571 


$655,175 






Comments: 1. In January 1992, in response to warnings from the Public 

Health Department about poor sanitation conditions at the 
since vacated Hibernia Bank Building, the Board of 
Supervisors approved an emergency procurement for the 
Police Department to contract with a firm to provide 
janitorial services for the Hibernia Bank Building, 
(Administrative Code Section 21.25). Because of an 
anticipated desire to contract for private janitorial services 
for the rest of their facilities in the future, the Police 
Department took the two contractors who were bidding Oil the 

HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

59 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



job at the Hibernia Bank Building on a walkthrough of all of 
the Police Department facilities to obtain an additional 
contracted service cost estimate. The Contracted Service Cost 
estimate is an average of the two contractor's bids which 
were based on the walkthrough of all of the facilities 
excluding the Hibernia Bank Building and the Hall of 
Justice. 

2. According to Officer Tom Strong, of the Police 
Department's Accounting Office, the Police Department has 
budgeted $33,796 in their FY 1992-93 budget to pay the 
Department of Public Works to provide janitorial services 
during the period of July 1, 1992 to July 31, 1992. This would 
prevent a lapse in service as the Police Department is still in 
the process of selecting a private contractor. The Department 
of Public Works has provided these janitorial services to the 
Police Department through FY 1992-93. 

3. FY 1992-93 would be the first year that the Police 
Department would fully contract for these janitorial services. 

4. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses, including MBE/WBE status is 
attached. Since the Police Department is still in the process 
of selecting a contractor, the MBE/WBE status is unknown. 

5. In response to questions raised at the July 8, 1992 Finance 
Committee Meeting, Mr. Steve Lutz, Senior Analyst of the 
Police Department's Planning Division, reports that the 
scope of janitorial services provided to the Police Department 
is not proposed to change, other than the elimination of the 
Hibernia Bank Building facility. He advises that the scope of 
janitorial services has always been established according to a 
published description in the City of San Francisco's Civil 
Service Code. Additionally, Mr. Lutz stated that the Police 
Department has been very unsatisfied with the level of service 
provided by DPW. 

6. Mr. Carl Bunch of the Mayor's Office, Employee Relations 
Division, is still in the process of verifying the City and 
County of San Francisco's obligation to meet and confer. Mr. 
Bunch will present his findings at the June 15, 1992 Finance 
Committee meeting. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOAIID OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

60 



Charter 8.300-1 (Proposition J) Questionnaire 

Department San Francisco Police Depart ment 

Contract Services Janitorial Service 

Time Period 

1) Who performed services prior to contracting out? 
Pepartmp.Tit of/ "Public Works Janitorial. 

2) Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting 
out? 

None, these employees should easily be absorbed into DPW 
operations. \ 

3) Explain disposition of employees if they were laid off. 

These employees can find employment Iti federal, state and 
private sectors.. 

4) What percent of City employee's time is spent on services to be 
contracted out? 

100% 

5) How long have services been contracted out? 

These services have been performed by. -the Department of 
Public Works. 

6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J 
Certification? 

It is anticipated to commence by 1992-1993. 

7) How will contract services meet the goals of y6ur MBE/WBE 
Action Plan? 

The competitive bid process will insure compliance. 
Present contractor at the Hibernia Bank Police Building is 

mbe/lbe. 



^2%£z£i 



Departmer^/Representative MICHAEL J. SULLIVAN 

SERGEANT OF POLICE 



(Type Nome/ Title) 

Telephone 

cxlquespj 



61 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item 3 - File 94-91-4.3 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meetings of May 
27, 1992 and June 3, 1992. 



Amount: 



Source of Funds: 



Department: Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Item: Request for release of a budgetary reserve of 1991-92 Federal 

Transit Administration Section 9 Capital Funds, including 
$51,598 in Federal funds and $13,402 in local matching funds 
for a total of $65,000 for Municipal Railway Contract No. MR- 
1039-R, Curtis E. Green Light Rail Facility, Geneva Site, 
Maintenance Building, Paint Booth Fans Modification. 

$65,000 

Urban Mass Transit 

Administration (UMTA) 

Section 9 Capital Assistance $51,598 

Local Match (See Comment 1) 13.402 

Total $65,000 

Description: The Board of Supervisors previously approved a resolution 

(File 94-91-4) which authorized the Public Utilities 
Commission (PUC) to apply for, accept and expend $13,815,120 
in Federal Urban Mass Transit Administration (UMTA) 
Section 9 formula assistance funds, and apply for, accept and 
expend $3,453,780 in local matching funds for a total of 
$17,268,900. Of the $17,268,900 in capital project funds 
available, a total of $13,892,500 was reserved ($11,114,000 of 
Federal funds and $2,778,500 of local funds), pending the 
selection of the contractors, budgets for the contractors, and 
the contractors' MBE/WBE/LBE status. According to the 
Controller's Office, $97,479 of the $13,892,500 reserve has 
been previously released by the Finance Committee. If the 
reserved funds of $65,000 ($51,598 of Federal funds and 
$13,402 of local funds) are released, a balance of $13,730,021 
would be left on reserve. 

Included in the original $13,892,500 reservation of funds is the 
sum of $8,342,600 that was reserved for Fixed Facility 
Rehabilitation. The projects included in this request for release 
of funds are a part of the Fixed Facility Rehabilitation 

allocation. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

62 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Comments: 1. The source of the $13,402 in matching funds under this 

request for the release of the reserved funds of $65,000, would 
be as follows: 



Transportation Planning and Development 

(TP&D) Grant $3,286 

Transit Impact Development Fees (TIDF) 3,286 

San Francisco Municipal Railway Improvement 

Corporation (SFMRIC) 6.830 

Total match: $13,402 

$56,781 of the $65,000 reserved funds would be used for an 
outside contract to modify the paint booth fans in MUNI's 
Curtis E. Green Light Rail Facility, Geneva Site, Maintenance 
Building. The remainder of the $65,000 request ($8,219) would 
be work ordered to the Department of Public Works to 
complete work at the Geneva Site to facilitate the relocation of 
the silk screen sign shop from the Potrero Site. The work 
includes building rehabilitation to add two windows for light 
and ventilation. The silk screen shop produces handbills and 
public information notices that are posted in MUNI transit 
vehicles notifying riders of time, route and other related 
changes. 

2. The PUC reports that bids for the proposed contract were 
received and opened on January 27, 1992. The contract for 
the modification of the paint booth fans was awarded to E. 
Mitchell, Inc., a San Francisco based firm, based on its low bid 
of $43,450. E. Mitchell, Inc., is pending certification by the 
Human Rights Commission (HRC) as a women-owned business 
and a locally-owned business. According to the HRC, their 
certification review will be completed in about two weeks. 

3. The budget for the proposed project is attached. The 
amount of $8,219 is a work order to DPW Bureau of Building 
Repair to add two windows that would provide light and 
ventilation for the relocation of the silk screen sign shop. 

4. Mr. John O'Neill of MUNI's Engineering Division reports 
that the 15 percent contingency amount shown in the attached 
budget is standard for rehabilitation projects because of the 
potential for unforeseen field conditions that often result in 
contract modifications. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

63 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

5. Ms. Marianne Malveaux of the PUC reports that the 
proposed paint booth fan modifications project is to be 
completed within 90 days of the contractor's Notice to Proceed 
date. 

6. The Budget Analyst believes that there should be a more 
cost effective method of printing public notices, such as desktop 
publishing, than MUNI's long standing practice of the 
silkscreen printing of such notices. MUNI should review other 
printing options before it relocates its silkscreen sign shop to 
the Curtis E. Green Light Rail Facility. Until that review is 
completed, the Board of Supervisors should continue to reserve 
$8,219 of the total $65,000 requested herewith and release the 
remaining $56,781 as requested. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed release of reserved funds by reducing the 
request by $8,219 from $65,000 to $56,781 and approve this 
release of reserve. Continue the reserve of $8,219 for 
renovation of MUNI's silk screen shop to the Call of the Chair. 



BOARD OF SUI'KKVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

6'. 



ROJECT NO. 
ST. PROJ. COST 



PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 
CAPITAL PROJECT EXPENDITURE AUTHORIZATION 
HETCHY MUNI WATER 
TITLE GENEVA -PAINT BOOTH/SHOP MODIFICATIONS 



$65,000 INITIATION DATE 



COMPLETION DATE 



.COOUNT NO. 




TASK DESCRIPTION 

1. UEB SERVICES INC FRINGES 

& INDIRECT COSTS 

A. PROJ. MANAGEMENT 

B. ENG. SERVICES 
C CONSTR. ENG. 

D. OTHER DIRECT EXPENSE 

(TRAVEL, M&S.REVOLVING FUND, ETC) 

TOTAL UBB 
7. NON-UEB SVCS. INC FRINGES 
& INDIRECT COSTS 
COSTS 

A. PROJ. MANAGEMENT 

B. ENG. SERVICES 
C CONSTR ENG. 

D. OTHER DIRECT EXPENSE 
(TRAVEL, M&S.REVOLVJNG FUND. IDWO) 
TOTAL NON-UEB 

3. CONSULTANT SERVICES 

4. CONTRACTS 

A. CONSTRUCTION 

B. MATERIALS 
C EQUIPMENT 
D.TAX(&.25%) 

TOTAL CONTRACTS 
5.CONTlGENCY(15S>) 

TOTAL BUDGET 
6. UNPROG RAMMED 
TOTAL APPROPRIATION 



INITIAL 



CONCEPTUAL 



BASELINE 



S1.013 


$1,013 


$1,300 


$1,300 


54,500 


$4,500 


$S,21S> 


$S,219 



ROJECT MANAGER UEB MANAGEMENT 



JiXJwL.. 



ENT MANAGEMENT FINANCE BUREAU 



FAM1S &. FMS REVENUE SOURCE INFORMATION [TO BE FURNISHED BY PUC 

FINANCE) 

FAMIS FUND GROUP/FUND INDEX CODE 

PROJECT/W/PHASE 



FMS REFERENCE; RESPONS1BIUTY CENTER 



PROJECT NO. 

DATE PROCESSED 



$15,032 
SO 



$43,450 


$43,450 


SO 


$0 


$0 


$6,51* 


$43,450 
$6,518 



65 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Item 4 -File 65-92-10 

Department 

Item: 



Location: 

Purpose of Sublease: 

Sublessee: 

No. of Sq. Ft 
and Revenue 
Per Month: 

Annual Revenue: 

% Increase Over 
1991-92: 



Utilities and Janitor 
Services: 



Term of Sublease: 
Escalation: 
Right of Renewal: 
Comments: 



Real Estate 

Ordinance authorizing and approving a sublease of City- 
owned property at 25 Van Ness Avenue, portion of first 
floor, to the Veterans Administration, commencing August 
1, 1992. 

25 Van Ness Avenue 

Office space for U.S. Veterans Administration, including 
outreach and counseling services. 

U.S. Veterans Administration 



2,480 square feet @ $2.09/sq. ftVmo., or $5,181.61/month. 
$62,179 



Rent will decrease by approximately 9.7 percent from the 
1991-92 level (see Comment No. 1). 



The City would provide electricity, water, and scavenger 
services. 

August 1, 1992 through July 31, 1997 (5 years) 

None 

None 

1. Mr. Dan Kennedy of the Real Estate Department states 
that the proposed rent of $2.09 per square foot is higher than 
the current market value, despite the rent decrease of 
approximately 9.7 percent from the 1991-92 rent of $5,738 per 
month. Mr. Kennedy reports that City Departments which 
occupy 25 Van Ness Avenue pay approximately $1.27 per 
square foot. The proposed rental rate for the Veteran's 
Administration (VA) is 64.6 percent greater than the rate 
charged to City Departments. Subleases with City 
Departments and the proposed sublease with the VA 
include similar terms for the provision by the City of 
electricity, water, and scavenger services. 



BOARD OF SIPKKVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

66 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



Mr. Kennedy reports that the higher rent to the Federal 
Veterans Administration helps to keep rents lower for City 
Departments at 25 Van Ness Avenue. 

2. The Department of Real Estate reports that the proposed 
sublease contains no escalation provisions over the five year 
term, nor any right of renewal. Therefore, the rent would 
remain at $5,181.61 per month, or $2.09 per square foot, 
through July 31, 1997, when the proposed sublease would 
expire. 

Mr. Kennedy states that the proposed rent to the VA of 
$2.09/sq. ft./mo. is expected to remain at or above fair 
market value through July 31, 1997, when the lease would 
expire. The Budget Analyst notes that the rental rate of 
$1.27 per square foot now charged to City Departments 
would have to increase at an annual rate of 10.5 percent 
over five years to reach the proposed rate to the Veterans 
Administration of $2.07 per square foot. 

3. The Department of Real Estate has budgeted $222,540 in 
1992-93 for the costs of Water, Light, Heat, and Power, and 
scavenger services at 25 Van Ness Avenue. The premises 
consist of approximately 136,000 rentable square feet. Thus, 
the City's cost for these services is estimated as 
approximately $1.64/sq. ft./year, or approximately $0.14/sq. 
ft. /month. 

4. According to the Real Estate Department, the City 
purchased the building at 25 Van Ness Avenue in October 
1991 under a Certificate of Participation with Security 
Pacific National Bank, which holds the title to the building. 
Mr. Steve Legnitto of the Real Estate Department states that 
a Certificate of Participation is a financial instrument 
similar to a bond, in which investors contribute a sum of 
money and receive repayments of interest and principal. 

Mr. Legnitto reports that the City will continue to lease the 
building from Security Pacific National Bank for 20 to 25 
years, until the invested funds are repaid, at which time the 
City will receive the title to the building. Rent paid to the 
City by City Departments and other tenants is used to 
finance the repayments. Since the City currently leases the 
building from Security Pacific Bank under the Certificate of 
Participation, the City must sublease, rather than lease, the 
premises to the tenants in the building. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

67 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item 5 -File 52-92-4 

1. Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Works (DPW) to accept 
$5,176 monetary compensation from property owners for the higher cost of 
procuring and installing special ornamental streetlight poles in Upper Ashbury 
Undergrounding District 309, Phase 2C. 

2. The Upper Ashbury Undergrounding District 309, Phase 2C, legislated 
in 1972 and funded by the Board of Supervisors in 1986, for undergrounding 
overhead wires and utility facilities, is scheduled for construction commencing 
August of 1992. The property owners within the undergrounding district have 
petitioned the City to install 15-foot ornamental streetlight poles, instead of 
standard 30-foot poles, for aesthetic reasons. 

3. The acquisition and installation costs for each 15-foot ornamental pole is 
$647 more than the comparable costs for each standard 30-foot pole. The property 
owners submitting the proposal have agreed to compensate the City for the higher 
cost of the 15-foot ornamental streetlight poles and have presented two cashiers 
checks totalling $5,176 to the DPW (8 poles @ $647 per pole). The DPW reports that 
the cost to maintain the 15-foot ornamental poles is comparable to the 
maintenance cost for the standard 30-foot poles. The Department would absorb 
the cost for maintaining the 15-foot poles in its ongoing maintenance budget. 

4. The proposal to install the eight 15-foot ornamental streetlight poles has 
been reviewed by the DPW and by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). Those 
departments have found that the proposal would not be in conflict with any 
established local or State policies, rules, regulations or codes. 

Comment 

Phase 2C of the Upper Ashbury Undergrounding District 309 is one of four 
geographic areas in that District, the others being Phases A, B and D. According 
to Mr. Hin Lok Kung of the DPW, construction work on Phases A, B and D has 
been completed. 

Recommendation 

Approve the proposed resolution. 



ItOARDOKSUI'KKVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item 6 -File 61-92-6 

Departments: Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Water Department 

Item: Resolution approving Contract Modifications No. 1 and No. 2 

(extending duration and increasing contract cost) to Water 
Department Contract WD-2088, repaving of street and 
sidewalk openings for the San Francisco Water Department, 
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1992. 

Description: The Public Utilities Commission currently has an "as- 

needed" type of construction contract for on-call repaving of 
street and sidewalk openings where the Water Department 
has been required to excavate for service connections and to 
repair water main leaks. The current contract, Water 
Department Contract WD-2088, which expired on June 30, 
1992, was for a maximum contract amount of $1,341,655 and 
was awarded to a joint venture, consisting of Stacy and 
Witbeck, Inc., Nationwide Construction Company, Inc. (a 
WBE firm), and West Bay Equipment Company (a MBE firm). 
In addition, Shelton Trucking (a MBE firm) served as a 
subcontractor. 

The PUC authorized the Water Department to advertise for 
bids for another contract to do the "as-needed" repaving work 
for fiscal year 1992-93, Water Department Contract WD-2136, 
on April 28, 1992. However, there have been delays in 
completing the bid documents and contracting process for 
Contract WD-2136. These delays were primarily attributed to 
staffing shortages and the Water Department's inability to 
proceed with advertising the contract until the Human 
Rights Commission (HRC) had furnished materials to be 
included in construction contracts to implement the new 
MBE/WBE Ordinance. Due to the delays, the PUC estimates 
that Contract WD-2136 will not be effective prior to October 1, 
1992. 

Additionally, the Water Department estimates that 
$4^97,457.23 must be added to the existing contract to provide 
for the required continuation of repaving services between 
July 1, 1992 and October 1, 1992. On June 23, 1992, the PUC 
adopted Resolution No. 92-0194, approving Modification No. 1, 
modifying the existing contract (Contract WD-2088) to extend 
the contract completion date to October 1, 1992, and to 
increase the maximum contract amount by 9.5 percent of the 
original contract amount, or by $127,457.23 to a new 
maximum contract amount of $1,469,1 12.23. 



BOARD OF SLUM IKVISOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

69 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

In addition, the same PUC resolution approved Modification 
No. 2, increasing the maximum contract amount by an 
additional $370,000 over the revised contract amount of 
$1,469,112.23, resulting in a new maximum contract amount 
of $1,839,112.23. The additional $370,000 results in a total 
contract change of 37 percent above the original contract 
amount, therefore requiring approval of Modification No. 2 by 
the Board of Supervisors as well as that of the PUC, pursuant 
to Section 6.6 of the San Francisco Administrative Code. 

The Water Department's Additions and Betterments 
Revolving Charges, which would be used to fund the 
proposed contract modification, is a revolving fund 
established prior to 1964 exclusively for street paving contract 
expenditures. The fund is replenished by charging directly 
to various capital projects funded through the Water 
Department's Capital Improvement Program. These monies 
come from appropriated Water Department revenues. 

The Water Department has submitted an Amendment to the 
Title of the proposed resolution, which will be introduced at 
the Finance Committee on July 15, 1992. The amended 
proposed resolution deletes Modification No. 1 from the title of 
the legislation, as only the PUC is required to approve the 9.5 
percent increase to the original contract amount. Therefore, 
the PUC is requesting only that the Board of Supervisors 
approve Modification No. 2, which would permit the Water 
Department to increase the revised contract amount by 
$370,000, resulting in a 37 percent increase over the original 
contract amount. The Amendment to the Title has been 
drafted by the Water Department in consultation with the 
City Attorney's Office. 

Comments: 1. Mr. Joe Pelayo of the Water Department reports that the 

contractors who did the repaving work under Contract WD- 
2088 have ceased to do any repaving, effective July 1, 1992, 
pending approval of the proposed resolution. Mr. Pelayo 
advises that the Water Department crews, who have done 
excavation work on or after July 1, 1992, have been instructed 
to make the excavations "safe" by putting in temporary 
asphalt. 

2. Mr. Pelayo advises that $1,469,112.23 (the original 
contract amount plus a 9.5 percent contingency) is the actual 
amount due to the contractor for repaving work done during 
fiscal year 1991-92, and that it is appropriate to use this base 
amount for computing a monthly average for the period July 
1, 1992 to October 1, 1992. For this three month period, the 
Water Department estimated that repaving costs would total 
approximately $367,278. Mr. Pelayo explained that the Water 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

70 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Department rounded the $367,278 upwards to $370,000 for 
purposes of the proposed resolution. To be more precise, the 
Budget Analyst recommends that the proposed resolution be 
amended to increase the maximum contract amount by an 
additional $367,278 over the revised contract amount of 
$1,469,112.23, resulting in a new maximum contract amount 
of $1,836,390.23. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to approve the increase of the 
maximum contract amount by an additional $367,278 over the 
revised contract amount of $1,469,112.23, resulting in a new 
maximum contract amount of $1,836,390.23. Approve the 
proposed resolution, as amended by the Water Department. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

71 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Item 7 - File 114-92-6 

Note: This item was transferred from the City Services Committee on July 
7, 1992 because it was determined to have fiscal impact. 



Department: 
Item: 



Description: 



Comments: 



Public Works, Bureau of Building Inspection 

Ordinance amending Part II, Chapter 1, of the San 
Francisco Municipal Code (Building Code) by adding 
Section 333.4 to impose fees for administering the 
unreinforced masonry building retrofit program. 

The proposed ordinance would add Section 333.4 to the 
City's Building Code to impose the following fee schedule 
for services related to the UMB Retrofit Program. 

a. Review of Inventory Form - $75.00 

b. Review of the Summary of Engineering Report - $150.00 

1. The proposed implementation of a UMB Retrofit Program 
(File 170-92-4) has been recommended for approval by the 
City Services and Finance Committees of the Board of 
Supervisors and is currently pending before the Board of 
Supervisors. 

2. The provisions of the proposed UMB Program include the 
requirement that a structural analysis of each of the City's 
approximately 1,930 UMBs be performed (2,000 UMBs less 
approximately 70 UMBs containing less than five dwelling 
units or guest rooms and used solely for residential 
purposes). The results of the structural analysis, 
complemented by an inventory form, a risk assessment, 
and an engineering report that details applicable retrofit 
assessment, all within specified time limits that are 
dependent on the UMB's assigned level of risk, would be 
submitted to the Bureau of Building Inspection of the 
Department of Public Works. 

3. This proposed ordinance would establish the foregoing 
fee schedule to compensate the Bureau of Building 
Inspection for its costs of reviewing the Inventory Form and 
the Summary of the Engineering Report. The proposed fee 
schedule was determined based upon the average estimated 
time that would bo required to complete the respective 
reviews. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

72 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

4. Revenues that would be produced by the proposed 
ordinance would be deposited in the Bureau of Building 
Inspection Special Fund. The maximum revenue that 
would be produced by the proposed fee schedule is 
approximately $434,250, (1,930 UMBs times $225), which 
would be used to compensate the Bureau of Building 
Inspection for its estimated review costs. 

5. On July 7, 1992, the City Services Committee 
recommended approval of the proposed ordinance. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance would be consistent 
with the Board of Supervisors enacting legislation relating 
to earthquake hazard reduction in UMBs. 




cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

73 



16 



'Public Library, (Documents (De-pt 

Memo to Finance Committee iMZlA£ GcTTU 3\pth 

July 15, 1992% 



REVISED 



Construction 

MUNI Metro Turnback $9,345,825 

Potrero Division Rehabilitation 

Contractor: Barnes 2,295,000 

Geneva/Green Capacity Modification 2,250,000 

Subway Signal System Replacement 

Contractor: Alcatel 4,685,522 

MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 1.200.000 



$19,776,347 



Equipment Purchase and Rehabilitation 

Articulated Trolley Coach Replacement $4,003,064 

Misc Rail Maintenance & Repair Equipment Acq. * 1,275,000 

F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC Streetcar Rehab. 

Contractor: Morrison Knudsen 425.000 

5,703,064 
* Partial purchases of a rail grinder ($625,000) a tunnel washer 
($400,000) high-rail lift truck ($64,500) digger-boom ($61,500), line 
truck ($90,000) and 10-wheel flat bed truck ($34,000). This totals 
$1,275,000. The balance from the $3,000,000 request as reflected in 
this resolution is identified under in-house project engineering and 
indirect costs or has been provided from previously approved sales 
tax revenues. 

Indirect Costs 

Articulated Trolley Coach Replacement $81,510 

MUNI Metro Turnback 219,042 

Potrero Division Rehabilitation 446,862 

Geneva/Green Capacity Modification 438,101 

Misc Rail Maintenance & Repair Equipment Acquisition 77,885 
Subway Signal System Replacement 360,425 

MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 84,375 

F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC Streetcar Rehabilitation 8,654 
Rail Replacement 187.500 

1.904.354 

Total $32,699,130 

4. Ms. Gail Bloom of the PUC Finance Bureau advises that 
the PUC has not begun their process to develop a Request for 
Proposal (RFP) for certain project phases including 
Professional Services, Construction and Equipment 
Purchase totaling $17,152,101 for the following: 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
JUL 1 6 J992 
BQARD QF SUPERVISPISS s FB4Nnc/ , 

BUDGET ANALYST p„* ™?5! sco 



46 



PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 

Local Match Funds Not Subject to Board of Supervisors Approval: 
MUNI Metro Turnback $11,682,282 

Geneva/Green Capacity Modification 3,000,000 

Misc Rail Maintenance & Repair Equipment 



Acquisition 


1,500,000 




Subway Signal System Replacement 


6,247,362 




MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 


1,500,000 




F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC 






Streetcar Rehabilitation 


500,000 




Rail Replacement 


500.000 




Subtotal 




$24,929,644 


Total Local Share 




$28,814,387 



2. Therefore the total amount of funds subject to this 
legislation is $32,699,130, $28,814,387 in State Proposition 116 
Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act funds and 
$3,884,743 in local match consisting of Bridge Toll revenues 
and San Francisco Municipal Railway Improvement 
Corporation (SFMRIC) funds. 

3. The total of $32,699,130 in State and local match funds is 
divided into six phases among the nine projects as follows: 

In-House Project Engineering 

Articulated Trolley Coach Replacement $271,702 

MUNI Metro Turnback 365,071 

Potrero Division Rehabilitation 318,138 

Geneva/Green Capacity Modification 311,899 
Misc Rail Maintenance & Repair Equipment Acquisition 147,115 

Subway Signal System Replacement 1,201,416 

MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 140,625 

F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC Streetcar Rehab. 28,845 

Rail Replacement 312.500 



5,097,311 



Professional Services 

Articulated Trolley Coach Replacement 353,212 

MUNI Metro Turnback 

Contractor: Bechtel/Sedgwick/James 1,752,342 

MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 

Contractor: Forster Jordan 75,000 

F-MARKET/EMBARCADERO PCC Streetcar Rehab. 

Contractor: Wong 37.500 



2,218,054 



BOARD OF SI JPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

45 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 15, 1992 



REVISED 



Professional Services 

Articulated Trolley Coaches Purchase/ Replacement 
Subtotal 
Construction 

Municipal Railway Metro Turnback 
Geneva/Green Capacity Modification 
MUNI Metro Extension to Sixth Street 
Subtotal 

Equipment Purchase 

Articulated Trolley Coaches Purchase/Replacement 
Subtotal 



8353.212 



$9,345,825 
2,250,000 
1.200.000 



S4.003.064 



$353,212 



$12,795,825 



4.003.064 
Total $17,152,101 

5. Ms. Bloom also advises that the current MBE/WBE/LBE 
goal for MUNI capital projects for FY 1991-92 is 32 percent 
and, through the second quarter, the actual amount in 
MBE/WBE/LBE contracts is 31 percent, one percent lower 
than their stated goal. 

6. The subject resolution title includes the phrase "to provide 
financing including $1,640,169 of estimated indirect costs" 
which is not also stated in the resolve portion of the 
resolution. The body of the proposed resolution should be 
amended to increase the amount of the indirect cost by 
$264,185 from $1,640,169 to $1,904,354 because no indirect cost 
for the local share was included. This additional amount is 
the indirect cost portion of the revised local share total of 
$3,884,743 identified in Comment 1. 

Recommendation: Amend the subject resolution as follows: 

Page 1, Line 5, change $28,814,387 to $3,884,743; 

Page 1, Line 6, change $1,640,169 to $1,904,354; 

Page 4, Line 5, change $28,814,387 to $3,884,743; 

Page 4, Line 9, add after "projects" the following phrase, "to 
provide financing including $1,904,354 of estimated indirect 
costs for nine Municipal Railway capital projects." 

Reserve $17,152,101 for professional services ($353,212), for 
construction ($12,795,825) and for equipment purchase 
($4,003,064) as identified in Comment 4 above. 

Approve the proposed resolution as amended. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

47 






CALENDAR 

SPECIAL MEETING OF 
FINANCE COMMITTEE /> 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

MONDAY, JULY 20, 1992 - 1:30 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

PRESENT: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, MIGDEN, HALLINAN 

CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 



NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 

counter in the Office of the Clerk of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 



File 127-92-6 . [Suspending 5 Percent of Parking Tax Surcharge] Ordinance amending 
Part III of the San Francisco Municipal Code by adding Section 602.5-2, which 
suspends five percent of the Parking Tax Surcharge, effective January 1, 1993. 
(Supervisor Gonzalez) 

ACTION: 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

JUL 17 1992 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



FINANCE COMMITTEE 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
ROOM 235, CITY HALL 
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 



IMPORTANT 
HEARING NOTICE 



CITY AND COUNTY 




(Pubtic Library, (Documents (Dept 
S¥F&{: Qzrry%gth 



OF SAN FRANCISCO 



board of Supervisors 



BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 

July 17, 1992 



TO: 
FROM: 



•ihance Committee 
Budget Analyst /^iL*"~i»**'4»t/o*>< 



SUBJECT: July 20, 1992 Special Finance Committee Meeting 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
JUL 2 1992 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Item 1 - File 127-92-6 



Item: 



Description: 



Ordinance amending Part III of the San Francisco 
Municipal Code by adding Section 602.5.2, which suspends 
five percent of the parking tax surcharge, effective January 
1, 1993. 

In June 1980, San Francisco voters approved Proposition R, 
to add a parking tax surcharge of 10 percent to the existing 
parking tax of 15 percent, for a total parking tax rate of 25 
percent. Between 1980 and December 1985, the Board of 
Supervisors, through a series of ordinances, deferred 
imposition of the Proposition R parking tax surcharge, in 
part due to uncertainties concerning the City's powers of 
taxation under Proposition 13. In December 1985, the 
Board of Supervisors imposed 5 percent of the 10 percent 
surcharge which had been approved by the voters in 1980, 
resulting in a total parking tax of 20 percent, and continued 
to defer the imposition of the remaining 5 percent of the 
Proposition R surcharge. In July 1991, the Board of 
Supervisors imposed the remaining 5 percent of the 
surcharge, resulting in a total parking tax rate of 25 
percent, effective August 1, 1992. 

Two-thirds of the 15 percent City parking tax is allocated to 
the General Fund, and one-third is allocated to the Senior 
Citizens Program Fund of the Commission on Aging. 
Proposition R required that the 10 percent parking tax 
surcharge be allocated entirely to the General Fund. 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 20, 1992 Special Finance Committee Meeting 

The proposed ordinance would suspend 5 percent of the 10 
percent parking tax surcharge which was imposed under 
Proposition R, effective January 1, 1993, or 6 months of 
fiscal year 1992-93. The proposed ordinance states that the 
suspension of the surcharge would expire if the Board of 
Supervisors were to adopt an ordinance terminating the 
suspension. 

Comments: 1. The Mayor's proposed budget for 1992-93 includes 

$22,465,300 in parking tax revenues allocated to the 
General Fund, and $6,000,000 in parking tax revenues 
allocated to the Senior Citizens Program Fund, for total 
estimated parking tax revenues in 1992-93 of $28,465,000. 

2. If the proposed ordinance is adopted, five percent of the 
ten percent parking tax surcharge would be suspended on 
January 1, 1993. The annual revenue to the General Fund 
from this five percent parking tax surcharge is estimated to 
be $5,616,325 over a full year. If this five percent surcharge 
were suspended for six months, as is being proposed under 
this ordinance, General Fund revenues would decrease by 
an estimated $2,808,163. 

Such a reduction in revenue would result in a General Fund 
shortfall of an estimated $2,808,163 in the proposed budget 
for 1992-93. Such a shortfall would require corresponding 
expenditure reductions or other increases in revenues in 
order to maintain a balanced budget. 

3. At a tax rate of 25 percent, the customer's payment of 
$1.00 represents a parking price of $.80 and parking tax of 
$.20 (equal to 25 percent of the $.80 price). At the 20 
percent tax rate which would take effect if the proposed 
ordinance is approved, the tax on $.80 would decrease to 
$.16. 

Since parking taxes are invisible to the consumer (because 
they are included in the advertised parking "fee"), it is 
uncertain whether posted rates will be reduced by a few 
cents on the dollar, in order to return the proposed tax 
decrease to the consumer. Mr. Tim Johnson of the 
Department of Parking and Traffic concurs in this opinion. 
To the extent that parking rates are reduced due to the 
lower tax rate, parking customers would realize the benefit 
of the tax reduction. If parking rates remain at their 
current level, the change in the tax rate would result in 
increased operating revenues of approximately $2.8 million 
to the City's parking garages. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 20, 1992 Special Finance Committee Meeting 

4. On an annual basis (for each complete fiscal year 
beginning July 1, 1993) the effect of the proposed lower tax 
rate would be an annual loss to the City of parking tax 
revenues of approximately $5,616,325, based on the 
estimated level and price of parking during 1992-93. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 




Harvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



^DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

JUL 2 3 7992 calendar public library (2) 

Hko „ DOCUMENTS DIVISION 

I 2 - S AN FRANCISCO ^N MEETING OF 

PUBLIC LIBRARY FINANCE COMMITTEE 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



r , JULY 22, 



WEDNESDAY, JULY 22, 1992 - 2:00 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

PRESENT: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, MIGDEN, HALLINAN 

CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 

NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 
counter in the Office of the Clerk of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 



File 100-92-5 . Hearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the revenue 
of the City and County of San Francisco. (Supervisor Migden) 
(Continued from 7/15/92) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to July 29, 1992, meeting. 

File 123-92-2 . [Permit and Inspection Fees] Ordinance amending Public Works Code 
by amending Sections 179, 184.52, 708.2 and 725.3 to change the amounts of various 
fees provided for in those sections. (Department of Public Works) 
(Cont'd from 7/1/92) 

ACTION: Amendment of the Whole adopted. Recommended as amended. New 

title: "Amending Public Works Code by amending Sections 184.52, 708.2 
and 725.3 to change the amounts of various fees provided for in those 
sections." 



3. File 94-91-4.3 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, Public 
Utilities Commission, in the amount of $65,000, for Municipal Railway Contract No. 
MR-1039-R, Curtis E. Green Light Rail Facility, Geneva Site, Maintenance Building, 
Paint Booth Fans Modification. (Public Utilities Commission) 

(Cont'd from 7/15/92) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Release of $32,500 recommended. Combined with File 
94-91-6.1. Filed. 

4. File 68-90-16.4 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, Mayor's 
Office - Community Partnership Program, in an amount totalling $29,000, ($20,000 
Mission Education Projects Inc. and $9,000 El Dorado School Neighborhood 
Betterment Association) for community based self group services. (Mayor) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Release of $29,000 recommended. Filed. 



5. File 61-92-1.2 . [Contract Award Extension] Resolution approving award of 
Municipal Railway Contract No. MR-1034R for procurement and installation of the 
Advanced Train Control System (ATCS); approving a further 60-day extension from 
July 7, 1992, within which to award the contract. (Public Utilities Commission) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

6. File 101-92-3 . [Government Funding] Ordinance appropriating $6,100,000, 
Department of Public Works, for various capital improvement projects. RO #92032 
(Controller) 

ACTION: Amended. (See file for details.) Recommended as amended. New title: 
"Appropriating $6,100,000, Department of Public Works, for various 
capital improvement projects; placing $5,259,420 on reserve." 

7. File 101-92-4 . [Government Funding] Ordinance appropriating $135,778, 
Department of Public Works, for various purposes. RO #92033 (Controller) 

ACTION: Recommended. 






CALENDAR 

MEETING OF 

FINANCE COMMITTEE 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 22, 1992 - 2:00 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

PRESENT: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, MIGDEN, HALLINAN 

CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 

NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 
counter in the Office of the Clerk of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 



1. File 100-92-5 . Hearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the revenue 
of the City and County of San Francisco. (Supervisor Migden) 

(Continued from 7/15/92) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to July 29, 1992, meeting. 

2. File 123-92-2 . [Permit and Inspection Fees] Ordinance amending Public Works Code 
by amending Sections 179, 184.52, 708.2 and 725.3 to change the amounts of various 
fees provided for in those sections. (Department of Public Works) 

(Cont'd from 7/1/92) 

ACTION: Amendment of the Whole adopted. Recommended as amended. New 

title: "Amending Public Works Code by amending Sections 184.52, 708.2 
and 725.3 to change the amounts of various fees provided for in those 
sections." 



3. File 94-91-4.3 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, Public 
Utilities Commission, in the amount of $65,000, for Municipal Railway Contract No. 
MR-1039-R, Curtis E. Green Light Rail Facility, Geneva Site, Maintenance Building, 
Paint Booth Fans Modification. (Public Utilities Commission) 

(Cont'd from 7/15/92) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Release of $32,500 recommended. Combined with File 
94-91-6.1. Filed. 

4. File 68-90-16.4 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, Mayor's 
Office - Community Partnership Program, in an amount totalling $29,000, ($20,000 
Mission Education Projects Inc. and $9,000 El Dorado School Neighborhood 
Betterment Association) for community based self group services. (Mayor) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Release of $29,000 recommended. Filed. 



5. File 61-92-1.2 . [Contract Award Extension] Resolution approving award of 
Municipal Railway Contract No. MR-1034R for procurement and installation of the 
Advanced Train Control System (ATCS); approving a further 60-day extension from 
July 7, 1992, within which to award the contract. (Public Utilities Commission) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

6. File 101-92-3 . [Government Funding] Ordinance appropriating $6,100,000, 
Department of Public Works, for various capital improvement projects. RO #92032 
(Controller) 

ACTION: Amended. (See file for details.) Recommended as amended. New title: 
"Appropriating $6,100,000, Department of Public Works, for various 
capital improvement projects; placing $5,259,420 on reserve." 

7. File 101-92-4 . [Government Funding] Ordinance appropriating $135,778, 
Department of Public Works, for various purposes. RO #92033 (Controller) 

ACTION: Recommended. 






S 



x^ 



CITY AND COUNTY 




(Public Library, (Documents (Dept 
WFBf: Qcrry%gtk 



OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 



DOCUMFMTC nco T| 

JUL 21 1992 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



July 20, 1992 



TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst Ktcann^dc^H 

SUBJECT: July 22, 1992 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 1 - File 100-92-5 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of July 
15, 1992. 

This is a hearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the revenues 
of the City and County of San Francisco. 

As of the writing of this report, several different proposals by the Governor 
and various portions of the California Legislature exist and no final steps have 
been taken toward final adoption of the 1992-93 State budget. Until such final 
adoption, we are unable to assess the exact impact on the revenues and 
expenditures of the City and County of San Francisco. 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 

Item 2 - File 123-92-2 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of July 
1, 1992. 

Department: Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Bureau of Engineering 

Item: Ordinance amending Part II, Chapter X, of the San 

Francisco Municipal Code (Public Works Code) by amending 
Sections 179, 184.52, 708.2 and 725.3 to increase the amounts 
of various fees provided for in those sections. 

Description: The sponsor of this proposed legislation has informed the 

Budget Analyst that an Amendment of the Whole will be 
introduced at the Finance Committee meeting to delete 
amending Section 179, which covers fees for placing Tables 
and Chairs charged to restaurants for use on City sidewalks. 
(This results in reduced annual revenue of $14,280 at this 
time). The sponsor informs the Budget Analyst that an 
amendment to Section 179 to increase those fees will be 
introduced at a later date. This report is based on the 
proposed Amendment of the Whole. 

The Department of Public Works (DPW) currently collects 
fees to cover the costs of processing various permits for 
encroachment of public sidewalks. DPW proposes to increase 
those fees as shown below: 



Type of Permit 

Distribution of Free Sample 

Merchandise 
Sidewalk Reconstruction 
Debris Boxes 



Existing Fee Proposed Fee 



$80/occurrence 
$12/100 sq. ft. 
$10/box 



$100/day 
$15/100 sq. ft. 
$20/box 



Percentage 
Increase 



25.0 

25.0 

100.0 



Comments: 1. The Department has provided the Budget Analyst with fee 

and revenue information for FY 1991-92 and FY 1992-93 on its 
Street Use Management Program, which includes fees and 
revenues for the subject three permits and for the planned 
Chairs and Tables fee increase. The Department estimates 
that approximately $1,402,000, or 65 percent, of the $2,173,528 
in FY 1991-92 Street Use Management Program total 
expenditures, is recovered through fees. The planned fee 
increases under the Amendment of the Whole would 
increase those fee revenues by approximately $153,720 to 
$1,555,720 in FY 1992-93, which is an increase of 
approximately 11 percent. Total projected expenditures for 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 



FY 1992-93 is $2,295,513, such that the proposed total fees of 
$1,555,720 would result in a cost recovery of approximately 68 
percent of these costs. 

2. Mr. Vit Troyan, Director of Public Services in the DPW, 
reports that the Department does not recover the full costs of 
its Street Use Management Program because the Program 
includes such general government functions as pavement 
management and inspection of roadway structures. 

3. The Mayor's FY 1992-93 budgeted revenues includes a 
proposed revenue enhancement of $168,000 or $14,280 more 
than the estimated revenues to be generated from the 
proposed Amendment of the Whole. 

4. Based on an anticipated effective starting date of 
approximately September 1, 1992, Mr. Troyan reports that a 
delay of approximately two months in implementing the 
proposed fee increases would reduce the FY 1992-93 revenue 
estimate by approximately $25,620 to $128,100. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed fee increases. 






BOARD OF S UPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 

Item 3 - File 94-91-6.1 

Note: At the request of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), the file 
number was changed from File 94-91-4.3 to File 94-91-6.1 to correct 
an error in the source and amount of funds to be released. In 
addition, this item was continued by the Finance Committee at its 
meetings of May 27, 1992, June 3, 1992 and July 15, 1992. 



Department: 

Item: 



Amount: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Request for release of a budgetary reserve of 1991-92 
State Transit Capital Improvement Funds for 
Municipal Railway Contract No. MR-1039-R, Curtis E. 
Green Light Rail Facility, Geneva Site, Maintenance 
Building, Paint Booth Fans Modification. 

$32,500 



Source of Funds: State Transit Capital Improvement Funds 

Description: The Board of Supervisors previously approved a 

resolution (File 94-91-6) which authorized the Public 
Utilities Commission (PUC) to apply for, accept and 
expend $194,534 in State Transit Capital Improvement 
Funds, and $194,534 in local matching funds for a total 
of $389,068. Of the $194,534 in State Transit Capital 
Improvement Funds available, a total of $149,000 was 
reserved, pending the selection of the contractors, 
budgets for the contractors, and the contractors' 
MBE/WBE/LBE status. To date, none of these reserves 
have been released. 

Comments: 1. A total amount of $56,781 would be used for MUNI 

overhead costs and an outside contract to modify the 
paint booth fans in MUNFs Curtis E. Green Light Rail 
Facility, Geneva Site, Maintenance Building. 

2. The source of the $24,281 ($56,781 total cost less 
$32,500 requested release of reserve) in matching funds 
which is in addition to this request for the release of the 
reserved funds of $32,500 comes from the San 
Francisco Municipal Railway Improvement 
Corporation (SFMRIC). These matching funds 
($24,281) were not reserved as part of the previously 
approved legislation. 



3. The PUC reports that bids for the proposed contract 
were received and opened on January 27, 1992. The 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

h 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 



contract for the modification of the paint booth fans 
was awarded to E. Mitchell, Inc., a San Francisco 
based firm, based on its low bid of $43,450. E. Mitchell, 
Inc., is pending certification by the Human Rights 
Commission (HRC) as a women-owned business and a 
locally-owned business. According to the HRC, their 
certification review will be completed in about two 
weeks. 

4. The budget for the proposed project is attached. In 
summary the total $56,781 ($65,000 less $8,219, which 
has been excluded from the attached budget, see 
Comment 7) would be divided among the following 
work items: 

MUNI Project Management $1,013 

MUNI Engineering Services 1,300 

MUNI Contract Management Services 4,500 

Construction Contract 43,450 

Contingency @ 15% of Contract 6.518 

Total $56,781 

5. Mr. John O'Neill of MUNI's Engineering Division 
reports that the 15 percent contingency amount shown 
in the attached budget is standard for rehabilitation 
projects because of the potential for unforeseen field 
conditions that often result in contract modifications. 

6. Ms. Marianne Malveaux of the PUC reports that the 
proposed paint booth fan modifications project is to be 
completed within 90 days of the contractor's Notice to 
Proceed date. 

7. PUC's previous request for release of funds (File 94- 
91-4.3) requested the use of $8,219 to construct two 
windows at the Curtis E. Green Light Rail Facility in 
order to assist in the relocation of their silk screen sign 
shop from the Potrero Site. Although this 
improvement is no longer part of the subject release of 
funds, the Budget Analyst believes that there should be 
a more cost effective method of printing public notices, 
such as desktop publishing, than MUNI's long 
standing practice of the silkscreen printing of such 
notices. MUNI should review other printing options to 
determine whether the publication of public notices 
can be accomplished less costly with some other 
printing method. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed Release of a Reserve. 

Request the Municipal Railway to review its current 
practice for printing public notices and advise the 
Board of Supervisors if there would be a more cost 
effective alternative to the current printing of notices by 
the process of silk screening. 



BOARD OF SI IPKRV1SOKS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

6 



Attachment 



II 



'O^ <j 



II 




LU 


n 


















II 




Q. 


n 


















II 
II 
II 

II 

II 




a 


ii 
ii 
n 
ii 
II 


















II 






ii 


nootu 


CD 


o 


o 


o o o 


o o o 


o 


O O 


II 






ii 


*- O O i- 




ID 


o 


O O tO 


to o to 


o 


O O 


II 


Q 




ti- 


©_ CO lO 10 


CM 


ir 


o_ 


*-. °* 


"O 


o 


o o 


II 
II 


UJ 


* 
h 


ll 


i- 1- tt <r> 


00 


CO 


LO 


CO l-~" 


CO 


CO 


nJ" co" 


CO 




W WW w 


to 


■»r 


CO 


T- CM 


CM 


00 


1*- ID 












to 


tO 


to to 




CM 


tO in- 


II 


> 


o 

1- 


n 












to 


tO 


to 


II 
II 
II 


UJ 


ii 
ii 


















II 
II 






ii 

II 


















II 


— 


— 


II - 


































II 






n 


o o o o 


o 


o 


o 


o o o 


OOO 


o 


o o 


II 






ii 


to to to to 


to 


o 


o 


tO tO tO 


IftWW 


o 


o to 


II 




LU 


ii 






lO 


LO 






to 


iq 


II 
II 




CD 


ii 

n 






cm" 


cm" 






CM 


cm" 



< II 

X ii 



O 
co 

or 

UJ CM 

O °? 
Q "5 
r> -? 

CQ o 
CO™ 



$ 2 i! 

> o> 

O '" 

<r^> i. 

Q. S < " 

^ H; 5 " 

^ CO -^ n 

rr > => " 

ujujcr |j 



S 



- CO t 

o < or 



o 



uj o 



>- 



CD 



< =! < 

£ < LL. 

or co ^ 

< LU ^ 

Q. cc O 

O < Q 

5 Q-UJ 

^ LU CO 

^ or < 

2 a dd 



lu M ^ ^ 
O 

a 

co 



9 " 

^ °- » 

o£ !! 

co !! 



CO o o co co o 
i- o o ■"-■«- 10 

O CO LO LO CM CO 



ooo 


o 


o o 


o 




o o 


to to to 


to 


to to 


to 


CM 
CO 

LU 

2 

r> 
- > 

cr 

T 


to to 


ooo 


o 


o o 


o 


1— 


o o 


o o to 


to 


o v> 


o 




o o 


N- CO 




LO 


LO 


Q 


lo o 


CD h- 




CO 


o 


LU 


Tf CO 


*- CM 




CM 


o 


h- 


Tf L0 


to to 






CM 


i ; 


to •«- 






to 


to 


LU 

_) 
_l 

o 
o 


to 



Q 






O 


n 




O 


ii 
n 
ii 




x 




in 


n 




n 


n 




z 


ii 
ii 












ii 






ii 


in 




ii 


CO 



$ $ :< ^ $ <: 

-z.-z.-z.-z.-z.-z. 



<: ;< ^ $ $ <! 

2 2 2 2 2 2 



;; a- 

!! ^ 



CO 



o 



CO 

n m s_ 
_ o ^~ 

^2 *£ 2 uj ° 



co 



CD 



o^.^r 



Z °3 



or 



LU 2 2 O 

LU 



w >- >- 

y O O 2 

> 2 ,„ O 



K or m 

s*isy 



^ ? 1- 

lu O 2 



< 2 

I- LL 
Cfl CO 



O 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 

Item 4 -File 68-90-16.4 

Department Mayor's Criminal Justice Council 

Item: Release of reserve for community based self-help group services 

Amount: $29,000 

Source of Funds: Federal grant from the Federal Office for Substance Abuse 
Prevention 

Description The Board of Supervisors previously approved legislation 

authorizing the Mayor's Office to apply for, accept and expend 
Federal grant funds in the amount of $721,186 for a project entitled 
"The Community Partnership Program" (File 68-90-16.1). At the 
same time, the Board of Supervisors placed $220,938, earmarked 
for contract services with community-based self-help groups, on 
reserve pending the Mayor's Office's submission of specific budget 
details for the individual contractors to the Finance Committee. 
The Finance Committee has previously released $145,276 of the 
$220,938 placed on reserve, leaving a balance of $75,662 on reserve. 
The Mayor's Office is now requesting the release of $29,000 to fund 
contract services with Mission Education Projects, Inc. ($20,000) 
and El Dorado School Neighborhood Betterment Council ($9,000). 
The Mayor's Office has submitted the detailed budgets for these 
two contractors, as follows: 

Mission Education Projects, Inc. 



Personnel 


FTE 




Executive Director 


.03 


$1,116 


Secretary 


.02 


378 


Accountant 


.02 


1,080 


Program Organizer 


.13 


4,000 


Project Liaison 


.19 


7,200 


Meeting Coordinator 


.04 


1,438 


Fringe Benefits 




2,061 


Subtotal 


.43 


$17,273 


Operating Expenses 






Office Supplies 




$500 


Computer Supplies 




120 


Printing 




1,000 


Audio/Visual Equipment Supplies 




500 


Postage 




174 


Insurance 




432 


Subtotal 




2.727 



Total 



$20,000 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 



El Dorado School Neighborhood Betterment Council 



Personnel 

Community Organizer (.23 FTE) 

Fringe Benefits 

Subtotal 


$3,750 

807 


$4,557 


Operating Expenses 
Consultant Services 
Utilities 


$113 
195 




Insurance 
Office Supplies 
Postage 
Subtotal 


1,000 

120 

71 


1,499 


Equipment 
Personal Computer 
Copier 
Subtotal 


$1,951 
993 


2.944 



Total $9,000 

Comments: 1. The Community Partnership Program is a City- wide multi- 

disciplinary, neighborhood and youth-oriented action plan, aimed 
at addressing the City's alcohol and drug abuse problems. The 
Program targets the following areas: (1) the Western Addition, (2) 
the Tenderloin, (3) Potrero Hill, (4) the Mission District, (5) 
Bayview Hunters Point (6) Visitation Valley/Sunnydale, (7) 
Oceanview-Merced-Ingleside and (8) Chinatown. The program 
objectives of the Community Partnership Program, as provided by 
the Mayor's Office, are as follows: 

1.) Encourage effective coordination by organizing drug 
prevention initiatives and convening neighborhood drug 
prevention councils. 

2.) Enhance or encourage the creation of at least 12 community- 
based self-help groups. 

3.) Enable 250 parents and 50 youth to assist in drug prevention 
activities. 

4.) Enhance and sustain a strategic planning effort which 
assures action steps are identified and implementation of 
projects occurs. 

5.) Create an ongoing training service to assist community 
members in neighborhood activities aimed at resolving 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

9 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 



alcohol and drug abuse problems, drug prevention strategies 
and treatment options. 

6.) Establish a Youth Council in seven target areas and Tenant 
Associations in five housing projects. 

2. Mission Education Projects, Inc., would (1) conduct outreach 
activities in three (3) school/neighborhood areas (Bryant 
Elementary School, George R. Moscone Elementary School 
and Hawthorne Elementary School) to generate and 
document data on substance abuse related issues and 
strategies used to combat drug abuse, (2) conduct three (3) 
school/neighborhood block area meetings to discuss and 
focus on the identified substance abuse related issues and 
strategies and analyze findings and develop draft reports and 
(3) conduct a conference to present draft reports, analyze 
findings and develop a final project report, which would 
serve as a resource tool to focus on and address specific 
substance abuse problems in the school/neighborhood areas. 

3. The El Dorado School Neighborhood Betterment Council 
(ESNBC) would (1) conduct a membership drive to increase 
ESNBC membership and develop fundraising strategies in 
order to enhance community involvement and organize the 
neighborhood to combat the sale of drugs, theft and other 
negative activities taking place on the neighborhood streets, 
(2) publish a monthly community newsletter and (3) conduct 
an outreach campaign to local business, City 
departments/agencies and local schools to involve them in 
the neighborhood empowerment drive. 



Recommendation: Release the reserve funds in the amount of $29,000. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 

Item 5 - File 61-92-1.2 



Department Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Item: Resolution approving award of Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Contract MR-1034R, for procurement and installation of an 
Advanced Train Control System and approving a further 60- 
day extension from July 7, 1992, within which to award the 
contract. 

Description; On February 24, 1992, the Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

received two bids for the procurement and installation of an 
Advanced Train Control System (ATCS) for the five-mile 
subway portion of the Muni Metro System. The primary 
objectives of the computer-based ATCS are to significantly 
improve capacity and safety in the subway through 
continuous tracking of all vehicles and control of 
acceleration, deceleration, location and speed. Two 
additional benefits from ATCS would be a reduction in 
MUNI's operating and maintenance costs. 

Upon review of the two bids, MUNI's Technical Pre- 
Qualification Committee found only one bidder, Alcatel 
Canada, Inc., was in full compliance with MUNI's technical 
requirements for qualification and thus eligible to have its 
price bid opened. According to PUC Resolution No. 92-0097, 
dated March 24, 1992, Alcatel Canada's base price bid of $33.9 
million exceeded the consulting engineer's estimate of $26 
million for the contract, by an additional $7.9 million. The 
total of Alcatel's bid, including all options, was $58.9 million. 

Pursuant to Section 6.1 of the Administrative Code, the PUC 
is required to award the contract within 60 days following the 
receipt of bids. On April 20, 1992, the Board of Supervisors 
adopted Resolution No. 331-92, granting extension of time for 
awarding the contract to Alcatel (MUNI Contract No. MR- 
1034R), to July 7, 1992, 120 days after the receipt of bids (File 
61-92-1). 

This extension of time was granted to provide additional time 
for the PUC to perform a price analysis of the bid submitted 
by Alcatel Canada for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 
(formerly the Urban Mass Transportation Administration - 
UMTA) purposes, to seek additional funding sources, and to 
negotiate with Alcatel Canada to reach a mutually acceptable 
contract price. 

The PUC approved the award of Contract MR-1034R to 
Alcatel Canada for an amount not to exceed $52.7 million on 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 



June 9, 1992, pursuant to PUC Resolution No. 92-0171 and 
subject to FTA approval of the request for a non-competitive 
negotiated procurement. 

Negotiations with Alcatel Canada have been completed. The 
PUC requested, and was granted FTA approval for a non- 
competitive negotiation, which was confirmed by a letter to 
the PUC from FTA, dated June 8, 1992. MUNI's 

consultants, Booz Allen & Hamilton, Inc., prepared a Price 
Analysis and Engineer's Estimates, primarily comparing 
MUNI Contract MR-1034R prices with those of a similar 
contract to upgrade the London Docklands Railway with fully 
automated train control equipment like that proposed for 
MUNI. Booz Allen concluded that the price of the proposed 
contract was reasonable, and that MUNI's proposed contract 
was lower in price than the London Docklands Railway 
contract, most likely because of economies of scale and 
reduced engineering costs due to the similarities between the 
two projects. One major factor that makes the proposed 
ATCS project more expensive than it would be otherwise is 
the added constraint that the ATCS equipment must be 
installed without disruption to the operations of the existing 
MUNI Metro service. 

As a result of the negotiations with Alcatel Canada, the base 
price of the contract was lowered from $33.9 million to $21.5 
million, a reduction of $12.4 million, and the total price, 
including all options, was lowered from $58.9 million to 
$52,725,465, a reduction of $6,174,535. Part of the decrease in 
the contract price can be attributed to the elimination of 
elements within the contract which MUNI determined were 
no longer necessary and a revision of the options schedule. 

The PUC is now requesting that the Board of Supervisors 
approve the award of the contract to Alcatel Canada, 
pursuant to Charter Section 3.502, and approve a second 60- 
day extension from July 7, 1992 to September 7, 1992, within 
which to award the contract. 



Comments: 1. Mr. Tom Sullivan of MUNI advises that in addition to the 

proposed $52.7 million contract for Alcatel, MUNI has 
budgeted approximately $6,249,347 for project management 
services and other expenditures related to the ATCS project, 
resulting in a total proposed expenditure of $58,974,812 over a 
three year period. (See Attachment 1 provided by the PUC, 
showing the details of the entire $58,974,812 budget.) 

Of the total of $58,974,812 budgeted for the entire ATCS project 
(the $52,725,465 contract which is the subject of this 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 



legislation, plus the $6,249,347 for project management and 
related services) $32,852,089 or 55.7 percent is anticipated to 
consist of Federal funds, $13,285,362 or 22.5 percent is 
anticipated to consist of State funds, and $12,837,361 or 21.8 
percent is anticipated to consist of local funds. 

2. Ms. Gail Bloom reports that as of July 14, 1992, MUNI has 
a total of $33,852,000 in local, State and Federal funds 
committed to the ATCS project thus far, and expects an 
additional $9,288,000 in State funds over the next few weeks, 
for a total of $43,140,000. 

3. Ms. Bloom also reports that the project has been designed 
so that each phase will produce improvements to the subway 
system, even if full funding for the project is not provided in 
later years. Mr. Sullivan advises that the contract provides 
that various options will be exercised by MUNI on a 
staggered basis. As more funding becomes available, MUNI 
can exercise more of the options in the contract, e.g., funding 
the installation of additional ATCS sets on light rail vehicles 
(LRVs). Attachment 2 is a copy of the ATCS financial plan 
provided by the PUC, dated July 14, 1992, listing all of the 
funding sources for the $58,974,812 budget. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 






BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



JUL 17 '92 li:i5 FLEET & SIGNAL ENGR 



Attachment 1 



ATCS SPENDING PLAN (Revised: 17 Jul 92) 



ACTIVITY 
ATCS CONTRACT MR-1034R 
PUC PRO J. MANAGEMENT 
PROJECT CONSULTANT 
SAFETY REVIEW/ AUDIT 
SYSTEM TESTING SUPPORT 
INSTALLATION SUPPORT 
PROJECT OFFICE 
FACTORY TEST/INSPECTION 
CHANGE ORDERS/MISC 

YEARLY TOTALS 

CUMULATIVE TOTALS 

PER CENT YEARLY TOTALS 

CUMULATIVE PER CENT 



FY 


FY 


FY 


FY 


FY 




X OF 


<=92 


92-93 


93-94 


94-95 


95-96 


TOTALS 


TOTAL 


$0 


$9,400 


$9,600 


$15,000 


$18,726 


$52,726 


89. 4X 


$490 


$240 


$380 


$470 


$550 


$2,130 


3.6X 


$460 


$150 


$100 


$80 


$100 


$890 


1.5X 


$0 


$75 


$100 


$125 


$50 


$350 


0.6X 


$0 


$30 


$60 


$360 


$480 


$930 


1.6X 


$0 


$32 


$128 


$160 


$100 


$420 


0.7X 


$35 


$50 


$50 


$75 


$75 


$285 


0.5X 


$0 


$15 


$25 


$25 


$15 


$80 


0.1X 


5 


$25 


$30 


$300 


$804 


$1,164 


2.0% 


$990 


$10,017 


$10,473 


$16,595 


$20,900 


$58,975 


100. OX 


$990 


$11,007 


$21,460 


$38,075 


$58,975 






1.7X 


17.0% 


17.8X 


28. IX 


35. 4X 






1.7X 


18. 7% 


36. 4X 


64.6X 


100.0X 







NOTES: 

1. All costs are in $1,0003. 

2. PUC PROJ. MANAGEMENT is overall ATCS Project Management. 

3. PROJECT CONSULTANT developed specification, provides technical assistance. 

4. SAFETY REVIEU/AUOIT is an independent review to assure Safe system operation 

5. SYSTEM TESTING SUPPORT is for non-revenue system testing nights and weekends 

6. INSTALLATION SUPPORT is for cutover/comection labor to existing signal system. 

7. PROJECT OFFICE covers costs for materials, supplies, phones, rent, etc during pro j"ect. 

8. FACTORY TEST/INSPECTION is for verification of testing at at mfg. facility and LRV2 factory. 

9. CHANGE OROERS/MISC is for contract oodifi cat ions and costs not originally planned. 



14 



92 07-- 14 1 1 : 1 4 



S 415 923 2562 



PUC FINANCE 




<G0 £ 



2|2ffl3§Pp 



m o 



fflO 



n ffl 



in 

I .w 

II c» 
II C" 
II K> 



II N> 



rs 



II -4 *. 







Memo to Finance Co mmi ttee 
July 22, 1992 



Item 6 - File 101-92-3 
Department: 



Item: 



Amount: 



Department of Public Works (DPW) - 

Bureau of Architecture (BOA) 
Fire Department 
California Academy of Sciences 

Supplemental appropriation ordinance, Department of Public 
Works, for various capital improvement projects. 

$6,100,000 






Source of Funds: 1989 Earthquake Safety Bonds (Phase I) 

Description; In April, 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved a resolution 

(File 170-92-3) which authorized and directed the sale of 
General Obligation bonds (1989 Earthquake Safety Bonds) in 
the amount of $6.1 million. The proposed ordinance would 
appropriate these $6.1 million of 1989 Earthquake Safety Bond 
funds. 

The proposed ordinance would be used primarily for seismic 
upgrading projects at Fire Stations #36, Fire Station #40, Fire 
Station #21, Pump Station #1, and the California Academy of 
Sciences - Research Wing. In addition to seismic upgrading 
projects, the proposed ordinance would also fund the 
following various capital improvements projects: 

• Disabled access improvements; 

• Design, construction and construction management; 

• Asbestos abatement; 

• Certain costs related to the bond sale, including bond 
counsel and investment advisory services, printing 
and other expenses. 

Comments: 1. The proposed supplemental funds would be used as 

follows: 



Fire Station #36 

Bureau of Architecture (BOA) Design Services 
BOA Construction Services 
Construction Contract 
Total Fire Station #36 

Fire Station #40 
Construction Contract 



$ 140,000 

35,000 

645.000 

$ 820,000 



$1,162,864 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 



Fire Station #21 

BOA Design Services $ 176,000 

BOA Construction Services 45,000 

Construction Contract 860.000 

Total Fire Station #21 $1,081,000 

Pump Station #1 

BOA Design Services $ 304,580 

BOA Construction Services 90,000 

Construction Contract 1.669.000 

Total Pump Station #1 $2,063,580 

California Academy of Sciences - Research Wing 
Construction Contract $ 916.000 

Subtotal $6,043,444 

Contingency 6,556 

Approximately .12 percent of construction 
contracts, totalling $5,252,864 (See Comment #6) 

Chief Administrative Officer (CAP) 10,000 

Citv Attorney 40.000 

Total Supplemental Appropriation Request $6,100,000 

2. The construction contractors for the above-listed projects 
have not yet been selected. Therefore, a total of $5,252,864 
(consisting of $645,000 for Fire Station #36, $1,162,864 for Fire 
Station #40, $860,000 for Fire Station #21, $1,669,000 for Pump 
Station #1 and $916,000 for the California Academy of 
Sciences) should be reserved pending the selection of the 
contractors, the MBE/WBE status of the contractors and 
finalized cost details. 

3. The $10,000 budgeted for the CAO's Office would be used for 
bond program coordination for the $6.1 million bond sale. 
This $10,000 would also cover expenses incurred by the 
Controller's Officer for review and certification of the bond 
funds. 

4. The $40,000 budgeted for the City Attorney's Office would 
be used for costs incurred for the review of bond writing and 
the preparation of legal documents for the $6.1 million bond 
sale. 

5. Mr. Roger Wong of the DPW's Bureau of Architecture 
(BOA) reports that the design and construction services 
which would be provided with the proposed supplemental 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 

funds would include general project administration, 
construction management and inspection. Mr. Wong also 
reports that the amount budgeted for BOA design services is 
estimated at approximately 18 percent to 22 percent of the 
construction contract, but these design service costs also 
include project contingencies, asbestos abatement 
monitoring and testing and plan check fees. BOA 
construction services are estimated between five and six 
percent of the construction contract. 

6. As noted above, the contingency costs of $6,556 which are 
included in the above-listed budget are only approximately .12 
percent of the total construction contracts totalling $5,252,864. 
According to Mr. Wong, contingency costs of approximately 
10 percent have already been included in the $5,252,864 
budgeted for construction contracts. However, Mr. Wong 
reports that the $6,556 budgeted for contingencies is for any 
additional design or construction contingencies which may 
arise. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends to reserve 
the $6,556 budgeted for contingencies pending the 
specification of any additional design or construction costs. 

7. The proposed supplemental appropriation ordinance 
would fund projects beginning approximately in August, 
1992 through January, 1995. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed ordinance to reserve a total of 
$5,259,420, which consists of $5,252,864 for construction 
contracts pending the selection of the contractors, the 
MBE/WBE status of the contractors and finalized cost details 
and $6,556 for design and construction contingencies pending 
the specification of any additional design or construction 
costs. 

2. Approve the proposed ordinance as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 



Item 7 - File 101-92-4 
Department: 



Item: 
Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Description- 






Department of Public Works (DPW), Bureau of Building 
Inspection (BBI) 

Supplemental Appropriation Ordinance 

$135,778 

State of California Controller - Code Enforcement and 
Rehabilitation Fund 

According to State law, the State may disallow certain rental 
tax deductions to owners of multiple unit housing complexes 
who fail to comply with enforcement mandates of State and 
local building codes. If the State disallows these tax 
deductions, the State is entitled to collect back taxes and any 
associated penalties. The State allocates, on an annual basis, 
a portion of these penalties and back taxes to participating 
counties to be used for the following State mandated 
purposes: (1) to defray costs incurred in the enforcement of 
local housing code provisions, (2) to fund housing 
rehabilitation programs for persons and families of low and 
moderate income, as denned in Section 50093 of the State 
Health and Safety Code, and (3) to prevent or minimize 
displacement of tenants and homeowners as a result of local 
enforcement activities. These State funds are deposited into 
the City's Code Enforcement Rehabilitation Fund (CERF) and 
must be separately appropriated by the Board of Supervisors. 

BBI requests appropriation of $135,778 of State monies 
allocated to the City to be used to administer and provide 
interest free Code Enforcement and Rehabilitation Fund 
(CERF) loans to low income single and two-family 
households and to purchase data processing equipment. BBI 
has submitted the following budget for the expenditure of the 
$135,778: 



Personnel 

1426 Senior Clerk Typist 
(Includes overhead and 
Mandatory Fringe Benefits) 

6270 Housing Inspector 
(Includes overhead) 



Subtotal 



.33FTE 



.13FTE 



.46FTE 



$20,219 
14.925 



$35,144 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 



Operating Expenses 

Administrative Costs for 15 loans @ $366 

per loan (Includes title insurance, escrow 

fees and recording fees) $5,490 

CERF Loan Fund 51.144 * 

Subtotal $56,634 

Data Processing Equipment 

Computer Software $30,000 

3-Computer Workstations @ $3,750 each 
(workstation includes a personal 
computer, monitor and printer) 11,250 

Miscellaneous Computer Accessories 2,750 

Subtotal Data Processing Equipment 44,000 

Total $135,778 

*The $51,144 would be added to the existing CERF Fund 
balance of $397,412, bringing the total amount available in the 
Fund to $448,556. The maximum amount allowed for a CERF 
loan is $7,500, which would result in an estimated minimum 
of 6.8 additional loans based on the additional $51,144 and 
$7,500 per loan. 



Comments: 1. Mr. Donald McConlogue of the DPW reports that the 

$44,000 budgeted for data processing equipment (software and 
hardware) represents a one-time cost to transfer the present 
CERF related data information system from the Controller's 
Information Services Division to BBI's data network. Mr. 
James Albert of the DPW reports that the transfer of the 
CERF related data information system represents a portion of 
a three-year automation plan to redesign and integrate BBI's 
business processes. Mr. McConlogue advises that DPW 
currently work orders approximately $2,000 to the 
Controller's Office annually, which will no longer be 
required when BBI assumes responsibility for administering 
its own CERF related data information system. The 
Electronic Information Processing Steering Committee 
(EIPSC) has reviewed and approved BBI's purchase of this 
data processing equipment in conjunction with BBI's three- 
year automation plan. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 22, 1992 



2. According to Mr. McConlogue, the BBI has historically 
funded an average of 20 CERF loans each year. However, for 
1991-92, a total of only nine loans totalling $41,810, at an 
average loan of $4,646, were funded. Mr. McConlogue 
advises that BBI is aware of the need to expand advertising 
and outreach efforts in order to make low-income households 
more aware of the availability of these loans, particularly 
since the CERF now has a balance of $448,556 representing at 
least 60 potential loans at a maximum of $7,500 each. Mr. 
McConlogue reports that BBI and the Mayor's Office of 
Housing have agreed to meet and develop a plan aimed at 
increasing the number of loans granted to qualified low- 
income applicants. The Mayor's Office of Housing has 
recently assumed responsibility for administering the CERF 
loans. Such loans had previously been administered by the 
Real Estate Department. Mr. McConlogue states that BBI is 
also in the process of examining other program options, 
outside of CERF loans, for the use of the CERF funds. No 
specific proposals in this regard have been developed at this 
time. Mr. McConlogue adds that any such proposals would 
have to conform to the State mandated guidelines, outlined 
above, for the use of the CERF monies. 

3. As noted above, the BBI has included administrative costs 
in the amount of $5,490, to process 15 loans during Fiscal 
Year 1992-93. Based on 15 loans at a maximum of $7,500 
each, the BBI would expend $112,500 of the available $448,556 
(current balance of $397,412 plus $51,144, which is the subject 
of this request) in the CERF Loan Fund, leaving a balance of 
$336,056, as of June 30, 1993. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Mahcr 




Harvey M. Rose 



Clerk of the Board 

Chief Administrative Officer 

Controller 

Kent Sims 

Jean Mariani 

Barbara Kolesar 

Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



U5 



■^ Calendar 



PUBLIC LIBRARY (2) 
DOCUMENTS DIVISION 






SPECIAL MEETING OF 
^FINANCE COMMITTEE 
-^=rBOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

y 

MONDAY, JULY 27, 1992 - 1:00 P.M. ROOM 228. CITY HALL 

PRESENT: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, M1GDEN, HALLINAN 
CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 



NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 

counter in the Office of the Clerk of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 



File 161-92-4 . [Redevelopment Agency Budget and Bonds] Resolution approving the 
budget of the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco for 
fiscal year 1992-1993; approving and authorizing an amendment to the indebtedness 
limitation agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and the City and County 
of San Francisco; and approving the issuance by the Agency of bonds in an aggregate 
principal amount not to exceed $65,000,000 for the purpose of financing 
redevelopment activities in fiscal year 1992-1993. (Supervisor Gonzalez) 
(7/20/92 - Rereferred to Committee with direction to 
report back, to Board on 7/27/92) 

ACTION: Amended on page 1, line 3, and on page 3, line 1, after "1992-1993", by 
adding "as amended". Further amended on page 3, line 1, after "in", by 
adding "amended". (See file for budget amendments.) Recommended as 
amended. New title: "Approving the budget of the Redevelopment 
Agency of the City and County of San Francisco for fiscal year 
1992-1993, as amended; approving and authorizing an amendment to the 
indebtedness limitation agreement between the Redevelopment Agency 
and the City and County of San Francisco; and approving the issuance by 
the Agency of bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed 
$65,000,000 for the purpose of financing redevelopment activities in 
fiscal year 1992-1993." 



DOCUMENT* rs--^ 

JUL 3 1992 

SAN FRANCIL'. J 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



.IS 

ha 



CITY AND COUNTY 




iruouc Library, [Documents CDept. 
S¥PB£ Qerry%gth 



OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 



July 24, 1992 



TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst faco~w£' : 

SUBJECT: July 27, 1992 Special Finance Committee Meeting 



DOCUMFMTS hfpt. 

JUL 2 7 1992 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Note: This item was rereferred from the Board of Supervisors to the Finance 
Committee for purposes of the Budget Analyst to analyze specific areas in 
the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency (SFRA) budget as directed by the 
Board of Supervisors. 



Item 1 -File 161-92-4 



Department 
Item: 



San Francisco Redevelopment Agency 

Resolution approving the budget of the Redevelopment 
Agency of the City and County of San Francisco for Fiscal 
Year 1992-93; approving and authorizing an amendment to 
the Indebtedness Limitation Agreement between the 
Redevelopment Agency and the City and County of San 
Francisco; and approving issuance by the Agency of bonds 
in an aggregate principle amount not to exceed $65,000,000 
for the purpose of financing Redevelopment activities in 
Fiscal Year 1992-93. 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 



$121,933,000 

Property Sales 

Rentals/Leases 

Prior Year Earnings/Savings 

Grants 

Debt Proceeds 

Developer Contributions 



$27,482,000 

6,170,000 

14,804,000 

5,000,000 

4,000,000 

500,000 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



Tax Increment $7,316,000 

1992-93 Tax Increment Bond 

Requirement 56.661.000 

Total $121,933,000 

Description: The San Francisco Redevelopment Agency has proposed a 

$121,933,000 budget for 1992-93 as follows: 

Legal $1,754,000 

Econ. Studies & Misc. Items 2,029,000 

Acquisition 16,000,000 

Public Improvements 22,147,000 

Architect. & Engineer. Design & Review 4,134,000 

Construction Monitoring 1,426,000 

Relocation 252,000 

Property Maintenance 3,435,000 

Housing Production & Assistance 20,437,000 

Employment/Business Assistance 1,476,000 

Business Dev./Revitalization 6,626,000 

Debt Service 12,689,000 

Refinancing: Fuji Debt 16,785,000 

Restricted Funds 3.964.000 

Subtotal $113,154,000 

Personnel Costs $7,096,000 

Administrative Costs 1.683.000 

Subtotal $8,779,000 

Total Project Costs $121.933.000 

A description of major project activities and anticipated 
accomplishments for each project for 1992-93 are as follows: 

Yerba Buena Center $50,967,000 

Complete construction of Central Block 2 Center for the 
Arts and Esplanade Garden with Martin Luther King, Jr. 
Memorial Fountain. The Agency would also start 
construction of the East Garden of Central Block 2 and 
complete design and start construction of the child care 
center, ice rink/bowling center, children's place, carousel 
and park on Central Block 3 as well as working with four 
citizens committees on issues relating to design and 
operation of the children's uses. The Agency would monitor 
construction of the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art 
and implementation of Affirmative Action goals. The 
Agency would work with the City to expand the Fifth and 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



Mission Street Garage, which includes design review and 
construction monitoring. 

Rincon Point - South Beach/South Beach Harbor $19.227.000 

Continue to monitor construction and affirmative 
marketing plan for housing. 

Complete acquisition of parcels and subsequent 
negotiations of Owner Participation/Land Disposition 
Agreement with a selected developer and begin design 
review of preliminary and final construction drawings. 

Prepare offering for development for commercial or 
residential uses. 

Participate in the maintenance of local streets of the 
Community Facilities District. 

Continue to pursue master lease for private development of 
Pier 40. 

Exercise option to lease with the Port and begin 
construction of South Beach Park and continue to maintain, 
operate and market the South Beach Harbor. 

Negotiate leasing agreement with the Port for Rincon Point 
Park, as well as conduct a toxic study and prepare concept 
design plans for the Rincon Point Park. 

Western Addition A-2 $4,601,000 

Continue to provide relocation, affirmative action, economic 
development, housing and public improvement activities in 
the Western Addition A-2. Future activity in the A-2 
Redevelopment Project Area is directed towards completion 
of the Fillmore Center with the development of Parcel 732-A 
and 732-B which would bring the total residential 
development in the designated Fillmore Center to 1,531 
units of housing. Over 400 of these units are affordable to 
households of very low, low and moderate income. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

3 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



Hunters Point $458,000 

Complete construction of 62 affordable housing units at one 
location and begin construction of 134 units of affordable 
ownership housing units and provide additional housing 
subsidies to purchasers of units to be constructed in the 
Hunters Point School II site. In addition, the Agency 
intends to fund the San Francisco Housing Development 
Corporation to market low and moderate housing. 

Hunters Point Shipyard $696,000 

Continue to negotiate with the Navy to produce Long-Term 
Lease for the Shipyard by June 30, 1993 and work with the 
Navy to expedite toxic clean-up schedule and toxic 
remediation. 

Work with the Citizens Advisory Group to develop economic 
development plan for long-term use and work with Mayor's 
Office of Business and Economic Development (MOBED) to 
develop a Master Plan. 

Relocate entry gate to achieve public access to the Shipyard. 

India Basin $353,000 

Monitor land use compliance under the Redevelopment 
Plan. 

Provide economic development assistance and opportunities 
through a program with the Urban Economic and 
Development Corporation. 

Affordable Housing Program $15,764,000 

The program would continue to be administered jointly 
with the Mayor's Office of Housing. The allocation of funds 
for each program category may be adjusted depending on 
need, but the overall program allocations totaling 
$15,764,000 would be: 

Nonprofit Acquisition, Rehabilitation 
and New Construction of Low/Moderate 

Housing $7,500,000 

Nonprofit and Tenant Purchase of 

At-risk Federally Subsidized 

Developments 1,100,000 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

4 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



Seismic Upgrading of Low-income 

Housing in Unreinforced 

Masonry Buildings $1,000,000 

Housing Loans and Grants 

to People with AIDS 4,000,000 

Affordable Housing Subsidies 2,000,000 

Relocation Assistance 152,000 

Fair Housing Testing in 

Agency-financed Rental Projects 12.000 

Total $15,764,000 

South of Market $3,475,000 

Acquisition of 2-3 family housing development sites for the 
development of approximately 100 family dwelling units 
and acquisition of 2-3 Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Hotels 
and/or apartment buildings for the purposes of 
rehabilitation and instituting better management. 

Initiate acquisition negotiations on potential new housing 
development sites. 

Begin construction on three new housing development sites 
which would produce 57 new family units and 140 
replacement SRO units. 

Establish a Housing Services Project to provide a variety of 
services to SOM area residents. 

Initiate construction design of street improvements. 

Continuation of lighting, safety, and street cleaning 
improvements on 6th Street. 

Initiate efforts to acquire land and develop a children's 
park. 

Complete and adopt an amended redevelopment plan. 

South Beach Harbor $6,717,000 

Continue to maintain and operate the harbor. 

South Bavshore Study Area $450,000 

Complete Phase 11 (Urban Design) implementation strategy 
for the proposed South Bayshore Redevelopment Plan. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

5 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



Begin process for creation of a survey area for the 
development of Third Street. 

Center for the Arts $2344,000 

Center for the Arts buildings are currently scheduled to be 
completed in April of 1993. Therefore, the goals for the 
Center for the Arts include developing a program plan for 
the Center, continuing to develop the fundraising plan, and 
developing an operational plan. 

Economic Development $7,602,000 

Identify at least three opportunity sites for commercial 
revitalization projects in project areas. 

Establish financing pools to assist small businesses. 

Originate and process at least five approved loan packages 
for the facade Improvements Loan Program for business in 
the South of Market Redevelopment Area and originate and 
process at least five approved loan packages for the South of 
Market guaranteed loan program. 

Implement Phase I recommendations for the Third Street 
Commercial Revitalization Program. 

Implement recommended programs for Chinatown. 

Implement recommended programs for Western Addition, 
India Basin and Hunters Point Redevelopment Areas. 

Conclude lease negotiations with the Navy regarding 
disposition of Hunters Point Naval Shipyard. 

Provide technical support for Citywide development plans. 

Successful placement of at least three small businesses in 
Bayview Plaza and Fillmore Center. 

Develop a small business incubator project in the Western 
Addition to assist small businesses. 

Central Relocation Services (CRS) $315,000 

Provide housing assistance to 750 displaced households, 
administer payments through the Special Temporary Rent 
Assistance program and coordinate approximately 90 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

6 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 

inspections of replacement housing by the Bureau of 
Building Inspection to assure that housing referrals are to 
standard units. In addition, CRS would provide relocation 
assistance and administer benefits to 13 businesses 
scheduled for displacement by City departments. 

Grand Total $113,469,000 

The proposed legislation would also approve and authorize 
an amendment to the Indebtedness Limitation Agreement 
between the SFRA and the City. This agreement authorizes 
the SFRA to claim $5,592,000 annually to repay the 1992 Tax 
Increment Bond and limits the SFRA to a cumulative 
annual tax increment payment of $12,908,000 per its 
statement of indebtedness to be filed by October 1, 1992. The 
$12,908,000 payment would be distributed as follows: 

1992-93 Proposed SFRA Tax Increment Revenue 

1989-90 Tax Increment $3,158,924 

1990-91 Tax Increment 1,853,150 

1991-92 Tax Increment 2,167,774 

South Beach Harbor Tax Increment 136.152 

Total Prior Year Tax Increment Revenue $7,316,000 

1992-93 Proposed Tax Increment 5.592.000 

Total 1992-93 Tax Increment Revenue $12,908,000 

The proposed legislation would finally approve the issuance 
of bonds in an aggregate principle amount not to exceed 
$65,000,000 for the purpose of financing 1992-93 
redevelopment activities. The Agency is requesting $65 
million as the aggregate principle amount in tax increment 
bonds, though the Agency only requires $56,661,000 or 
$8,339,000 less than $65 million. According to Mr. Bob 
Gamble of the Redevelopment Agency, the Agency would 
need 10 percent of the $56,661,000 bond amount or $5,666,100 
to pay bond issuance costs and the remaining $2,672,900 
would be used as a contingency to take into account changes 
in interest rates. 

Comments: 1. The Budget Analyst has recommended reductions to the 

SFRA FY 1992-93 proposed expenditures which total 
$143,159 as follows: 

Delete Vacant Secretary II $36,426 

Delete Vacant Sr Clerk Typist 16,471 

Reduce Fringe Benefits 10,193 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

7 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



Temporary Employee & 




Replacement Costs 


$11,976 


Communication-Telephone 


1,337 


Communication-Postage & Express 


5,149 


Travel-Local 


1,141 


Travel-Out-of-Town 


357 


Office Supplies 


8,015 


Janitorial Supplies 


716 


Supplies: 




Mimeo/Printing/Photography 


11,743 


Lease 


13,150 


Other Costs 


5,235 


Purchase: 




Machines/Equipment/Furniture 


21.250 



Total $143,159 

In addition, the Budget Analyst has recommended the 
following reserves: 

Six Months funding for Six 

Clerical Positions $113,653 

Six Months Funding for 

Fringe Benefits for Six 

Clerical Positions 22,367 

Previously appropriated Economic 

Development Funds 3,450,000 

10-months funding for 

Central Records 186.330 

Total $3,772,350 

As of the writing of this report, these budgetary 
recommendations are being considered again by the 
Finance Committee after being rereferred from the Board of 
Supervisors for purposes of the Budget Analyst to analyze 
specific areas in the SFRA budget as directed by the Board 
of Supervisors. 

2. The Agency reports that as of June 1, 1992, $361,000 of 
$1,624,000 in economic development funds for the Western 
Addition has been spent in previous fiscal years. These 
funds were appropriated in fiscal year 1990-91 for economic 
development activities and have been carried forward last 
fiscal year and again this fiscal year. In addition, as of 
June 1, 1992 $515,000 of the $2,702,000 of economic 
development funds for Hunters Point have also been spent. 
Again, these funds were originally appropriated in FY 
1990-91. As such, the Agency's FY 1992-93 budget should be 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



amended to reduce the Prior Year Earnings/Savings 
Revenues by $876,000, from $14,804,000 to $13,928,000. 
Further, the Agency's 1992-93 budget should be amended to 
reduce Economic Development Expenditures by $876,000, 
from $7,602,000 to $6,726,000. 

3. The Budget Analyst completed a management audit of 
the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency in January of 
1992 which made several findings and recommendations 
including the following: 

• The Redevelopment Agency's 26 clerical positions are 
relatively high compared to other similar City departments 
and other redevelopment agencies. The Agency has an 
automated voice mail telephone answering system and 79 
percent of Agency staff have a computer at their desk. 
Further, the Agency employs Executive Secretaries to work 
in non-executive divisions. The Budget Analyst 
recommended that the Agency conduct a classification and 
workload study to determine their clerical staffing needs 
and to reduce clerical staff by eight positions. Because the 
Agency currently has two vacant clerical positions, we are 
recommending deleting them. In addition, the Agency 
reports that a workload and classification study will be 
completed within six months. As such, we recommend that 
funding for six clerical positions be placed on reserve for 
the last six months of fiscal year 1992-93, pending the 
outcome of this study. 

• The process of implementing the Agency's economic 
development program has not occurred in an effective and 
efficient manner. The Agency Commission has yet to adopt 
an implementation plan for the program since its inception 
two years ago. Funds have not been awarded through a 
competitive evaluation process, and no needs assessment 
has occurred prior to awarding funds for economic 
development programs. As a result of these findings, the 
Budget Analyst recommended that the Board of Supervisors 
not allocate additional funds for economic development 
programs until the Board of Supervisors has received and 
reviewed a copy of an economic development plan. 

The Agency reports that an economic development strategic 
plan for the City is being developed by the Agency in 
conjunction with the Mayor's Office of Business and 
Economic Development and the Board of Supervisors. In 
addition, the Agency has developed an economic 
development implementation plan to be reviewed by the 
Redevelopment Commission within the next two months. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

9 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



We recommend that $3,450,000 of previously appropriated 
but unspent economic development program funding 
proposed in the FY 1992-93 budget be placed on reserve 
pending submission to the Board of Supervisors of the 
approved economic development strategic plan and/or the 
economic development implementation plan. 

The budget the Agency submits to the Board of Supervisors 
does not include data on actual revenues and expenditures 
from previous fiscal years, does not include interest income 
as a separate line item, nor does it include five-year 
projections on how much funding the Agency anticipates 
needing. Primarily because of the timing of the Budget 
Analyst's Management Audit report, the proposed FY 1992- 
93 budget does not include these items. However, the 
Agency did submit these items to the Budget Analyst 
separately. 

The Agency's Records Retention Program has not been 
evaluated since its formal inception and should be re- 
evaluated by the Agency Commission. The Budget Analyst 
recommended that the program be evaluated to determine 
whether it would be less expensive for the Agency to 
contract out the microfilming of Agency documents. The 
Agency reports to have assembled a Records Management 
Program Task Force. This Task Force is expected to arrive 
at a decision regarding the financial feasibility of 
contracting out microfilming sometime in August of 1992. 
As such, we recommend reserving $186,330 or 10 months 
funding for the Records Retention Program pending 
submission of the Records Management Program Task 
Force's report to the Board of Supervisors. 

4. The Budget Analyst's Management Audit report also 
recommended that because it would be less expensive in the 
long run to fund redevelopment activities on a pay-as-you-go 
basis instead of debt financing, the Board of Supervisors 
should consider pay-as-you-go as a policy option when they 
review future tax increment-backed bond issues. However, 
pay-as-you-go would cost the City's General Fund 
approximately $49,578,375 (87.5 percent of the proposed 
$56,661,000 bond requirement) in fiscal year 1992-93 as 
compared to costing the General Fund approximately 
$4,893,000 ($5,592,000 tax increment revenue x 87.5 percent) 
in fiscal year 1992-93 to repay the proposed bond and 
$146,790,000 over the next 30-years ($4,893,000 x 30 years.) 
Although the Budget Analyst believes it would be more 
fiscally prudent in the long run to fund redevelopment 
activities on a pay-as-you-go basis instead of debt financing 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



them, the current condition of the City's General Fund 
budget could not absorb the additional $49,578,375 
expenditure. As such, the Budget Analyst recommends 
approving the proposed $65,000,000 bond issuance. 

5. The Budget Analyst's proposed reductions of the 
Agency's budget totaling $143,159 would reduce the Tax 
Increment bond requirement by $143,159, from $56,661,000 
to $56,517,841. The proposed 1992-93 Tax Increment 
payment of $5,592,000 would be reduced by $13,689 to 
$5,578,311. Over 30 years, the total savings would be 
$410,670. 87.5 percent of the City's property tax revenue is 
deposited into the General Fund. As such, the proposed 
reductions would reduce the General Fund contribution by 
$11,978 each year for 30 years for a total of $359,340 in 
General Fund savings. 

6. The Agency receives interest income from unspent funds 
during the course of the fiscal year that is subsequently 
budgeted in the Prior Year Earnings account in the 
following fiscal year. The Agency projects that the Agency 
will earn approximately $2.1 million in interest income 
during FY 1992-93. This $2.1 million will be budgeted in FY 
1993-94. 

7. In December of 1991, the Redevelopment Agency 
contracted with a private consulting firm to perform a 
management audit of the Center for the Arts at Yerba 
Buena Center. The consulting firm, Melanie Beene and 
Associates, has recently completed this audit and 
submitted a 67 page report. The following is a brief listing of 
the audit's findings: 

• The Center for the Arts is the progeny of a real estate 
transaction. The Center is neither artist-driven nor 
board-driven. 

• The extended time lag in commitment and action by the 
Agency and the master developer has put the project at 
risk. 

• The external environment has changed significantly 
since the project's inception. 

• It is questionable whether the facilities, as configured, 
are sufficiently "needed" by the community to ensure the 
operation's economic viability. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



• The governance structure of the organization is a hybrid 
one which will continue to create tensions/limitations 
for the organization. 

• There is an inadequate knowledge base of the 
functioning of the producing arts industry within the 
board, staff and Agency to ensure proper 
implementation of, or accountability for, the project. 

• The project is conceived and operating under erroneous 
assumptions. 

• The mission of the organization is poorly articulated and 
inadequately understood. 



Additional Budget Analysis as Requested bv the Board of Supervisors 

Yerba Buena Center Outside Legal Counsel ($370,000) 

Outside legal services totaling $370,000 are needed (1) to continue the 
negotiation with Olympia & York (O&Y) for a General Release, an Option 
Agreement and matters related to recordation of Quit Claim Deeds for Central 
Block-1 Office Parcel, (2) representation of the SFRA in connection with possible 
bankruptcy of O&Y (New York Bankruptcy Court), and (3) representation of SFRA 
in connection with bankruptcy of TALDEN, the developer of the supermarket and 
the housing at 4th and Harrison Streets. The Budget Analyst concurs with this 
budgeted amount in order to minimize SFRA exposure in the O&Y bankruptcy. 
However, the Budget Analyst has identified unused funds totaling $35,000 from 
the 1990-91 budget for Yerba Buena Center outside legal services and therefore 
recommends a deletion of $35,000. 

Yerba Buena Center Contingency Funds ($650,000) 

This amount reflects one percent of the anticipated construction cost on 
Central Block-2 ($65 million) for the defense against claims arising from such 
construction. Since all of the construction will not occur during 1992-93, the 
Budget Analyst believes that at least $100,000 of the $650,000 can be budgeted in the 
next fiscal year and recommends a reduction of $100,000 in the 1992-93 budget. 

Rincon PoinfcSouth Beach Outside Legal Counsel ($125,000) 

This amount is for outside legal counsel for the negotiation of the Land 
Disposition Agreement with The Gap, the potential developer of Site C-l, two 
eminent domain actions for acquisition of the site to be sold to The Gap, and advice 
on toxic materials issues throughout the project area. The Budget Analyst 
believes that such services can be partially accomplished in-house by SFRA 
attorneys and recommends a reduction of $25,000. In addition, a residual of 
$136,000 remains in the 1990-91 budgeted funds which can offset 1992-93 budgeted 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 

expenditures. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends a total reduction of 
$161,000 in the 1992-93 budget. 

Rincon Point/South Beach Contingency Funds ($75,000) 

Based on our inquiry, SFRA agrees to eliminate this budgeted item from the 
1992-93 budget because it is not needed. Therefore, the Budget Analyst 
recommends a reduction of $75,000. 

South Beach Harbor Outside Legal Counsel ($9,000) 

This requested amount is based on previous legal experience for the 
impounding of vessels and Federal lien sales to collect delinquent dockage fees 
associated with the South Beach Harbor. Because of the small amount, the 
Budget Analyst believes that such claims can be administered in-house by the 
SFRA attorneys. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends a reduction of 
$9,000. 

South Beach Harbor Contingency Funds ($25,000) 

Based on a review of the history of existing claims, the Budget Analyst 
concurs with this requested setaside for South Beach Harbor claims. 

Western Addition A-2 Outside Legal Counsel ($250,000) 

These funds include (1) litigation costs for Independent Housing Services, 
et al. v. Fillmore Center Associates, SFRA, et al., which seeks to establish Agency 
responsibility for assuring developer compliance with handicapped access laws, 
(2) representation of the SFRA in the Fillmore Center Associates (FCA) 
bankruptcy proceedings in order to assure continued availability of 223 affordable 
units in the project and the fulfillment of FCA's responsibility to build a 
community center, and the (3) defense of 43 lien claims asserted against the SFRA 
as a result of Fillmore Center's bankruptcy. Because a total of $130,000 of the legal 
services remains unspent from the 1990-91 SFRA budget, the Budget Analyst 
recommends a reduction of $130,000 in the 1992-93 budget. 

Western Addition Contingency Funds ($50,000) 

This amount is budgeted for the payoff of mechanic liens with which the 
Budget Analyst concurs. 

Hunters Point Naval Shipyard Outside Legal Counsel ($50,000) 

Outside legal assistance is needed for the preparation of California 
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents, toxic material issues (the 
Shipyard is currently designated a Superfund site) that would surpass current 
Federal cleanup standards for industrial sites, real estate issues in connection 
with the negotiations and drafting of a Lease and Management Agreement for the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 

Shipyard. The Budget Analyst concurs with the amount funded for this budgeted 
item. 

Hunters Point Naval Shipyard Contingency Funds ($25,000) 

This represents the payoff of possible nuisance claims which the Budget 
Analyst believes is a reasonable setaside for this cost. 

India Basin Industrial Park Outside Legal Counsel ($50,000) 

This amount is for outside legal assistance for a specific case involving 
toxics. Because there a residual of $15,000 for legal services from the 1990-91 
budget, the Budget Analyst recommends a reduction of $15,000 in the 1992-93 
budget. 

South of Market Outside Legal Counsel ($25,000) 

This amount is for outside legal counsel to assist SFRA staff attorneys with 
condemnation proceedings for unsafe buildings as the result of the earthquake. 
Since there is a residual of $38,000 from the 1990-91 budget, the Budget Analyst 
recommends a reduction of $38,000. 

South Bayshore Outside Legal Counsel ($50,000) 

To date, South Bayshore remains a project in a preliminary planning 
status without a Board of Supervisors designated Project Survey Area. Under 
these circumstances, the Budget Analyst believes that legal services for 
environmental and toxic studies should be reduced by 50 percent for a savings of 
$25,000. 

Adjustments to Reductions from Prior Year Funds for Outside Legal 
Counsel (-$17,000) 

Residual funds budgeted for legal services in the FY 1990-91 budget include 
$80,000 for Hunters Point. However, Mr. Gamble has advised that the FY 1991-92 
budget for legal services had an ending year $97,000 cost overrun related to 
unanticipated outside legal expenses, resulting in an additional need of $17,000 
($97,000 less $80,000). It is recommended that the above recommendations for 
reductions by the Budget Analyst be offset by this $17,000 need. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 

A recap of the recommended savings in Outside Legal Counsel and related 
Contingency Fund expenditures are as follows: 

Yerba Buena Center $135,000 

Rincon Point-South Beach 236,000 

South Beach Harbor 9,000 

Western Addition A-2 130,000 

India Basin Industrial Park 15,000 

South of Market 38,000 

South Bayshore 25,000 

Adjustment to Savings (17.000) 

Total Recommended Reductions $571,000 

The SFRA advises that outside legal assistance is needed to complete all of 
the work assignments required by the City's Redevelopment Program and related 
activities. The in-house legal staff consists of the SFRA General Counsel at an 
annual salary of $100,126 and two Deputy General Counsels at an annual salary 
of $84,448 each. Fringe benefits for these three positions total $51,838 ($269,022 x 
.19269). The salary and fringe benefit cost for these three positions totals $320,860. 
This staff is assisted by two legal secretaries and part-time clerical and legal clerk 
(second year law student). This staff manages the legal affairs of the SFRA, 
including direct involvement in and coordination of litigation, and advisory 
services provided by outside counsel. The total in-house legal staff budget for FY 
1992-93 is $473,413. 

The Agency General Counsel supervises the work of outside litigation 
counsel on all major litigation matters, including making fundamental strategic 
decisions, deciding whether or not to recommend a settlement to the 
Redevelopment Commission, reviewing all drafts of briefs, declarations and 
related matters and preparing SFRA witnesses for depositions and for trial. 

The Deputy General Counsels oversee all of the legal work associated with 
the SFRA housing and economic development programs, all legal work 
associated with personnel and labor relations matters, all conflict of interest 
matters as they affect SFRA staff and Commissioners, all legal work associated 
with construction, as well as compliance with local, State and Federal 
requirements related to the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) 
Program (CDBG program income is a significant source of SFRA funding), the 
subsidized housing programs of the Federal Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, the Federal Tax Code as it relates to low-income housing programs 
and State statutes and regulations with respect to housing programs. The 
Deputies also oversee much of the work related to the Agency's public finance 
activities, related to SFRA agreements with owners of property in project areas 
(owner participation agreements), and all but the very largest and most complex 
of agreements involving the disposition of SFRA-owned land to developers (land 
disposition agreements and development ground leases). 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 

The Budget Analyst has also reviewed contractual and work order services 
for various economic analyses and project activities and provides these comments 
and recommendations by individual projects as follows: 

Yerba Buena Center Economic Evaluations ($150,000) 

Currently, the SFRA has four major sites valued at $87.0 million and one 
minor site valued at $2.3 million which need to be sold, and a $45.0 million 
entertainment/retail development which has a development Request for 
Qualifications set for issuance. These developments represent $134.3 million. In 
order to achieve the public benefits desired from the sale and lease of these sites, 
the SFRA needs to draw upon technical assistance from outside consultants to 
determine the optimum value for these sites based on the current market and the 
future of the city's economy. The Budget Analyst believes that these economic 
analyses can be performed for $120,000 with a savings of $30,000 to the budget 
because a portion of the analysis can be performed by existing staff. Therefore, 
the Budget Analyst recommends a reduction of $30,000 from this $150,000 request. 

Yerba Buena Center Other Related Services and Analyses ($66,000) 

This request includes Bureau of Building Inspection (BBI) inspections and 
engineering services ($20,000), toxic studies ($40,000) and traffic analysis ($6,000). 
BBI inspections must be performed for 693 Mission Street, the Jessie Street 
Substation and the Jessie Hotel. Engineering services would investigate potential 
structural problems for SFRA owned properties. Toxic studies are needed due to 
the presence of contaminated materials and the preparation of remediation plans. 
Traffic analysis would be performed by the Department of Parking and Traffic to 
evaluate lane closures, detours and other related traffic safety measures while 
improvements are being constructed on Sites CB-2 and CB-3. The Budget Analyst 
concurs that these are necessary budgeted costs. 

Rincon Point/South Beach Economic Analysis ($30,000) 

These studies will assist the development and marketing of three sub areas, 
Rincon Point Park, South Beach Park and Sites D and F. Economic analysis is 
needed for Rincon Point Park to analyze the siting of a restaurant (Tavern on the 
Green) as a source of revenue in lieu of rent for the use of Port Land for the Park. 
With respect to South Beach Park, the SFRA is obligated to pay rent to the Port 
when it exercises its option to lease the area as a park. Revenues generated by 
current tenants is significantly less than SFRA is required to pay the Port. The 
SFRA needs to look at potential revenues sources for South Beach Park which are 
compatible with the current Redevelopment Plan. Sites D and F may require 
additional outside economic analysis in order to achieve economically feasible 
projects which would require a plan change. The Budget Analyst concurs with 
these costs. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 

Rincon PoinfcSouth Beach Toxic Studies and Remediation ($200,000) 

This cost is divided between Rincon Point Park ($125,000) and South Beach 
Park ($75,000). The SFRA is continuing to conduct toxics studies on the Rincon 
Point Park to determine the extent of remediation work associated with toxic 
contamination. Remediation work includes preliminary endangerment 
assessment, on-site mitigation of excavated materials and placement of an 
impervious barrier at the bottom of the excavation. For the development of South 
Beach Park, the SFRA is planning on exercising its option to lease Seawall Lot 334 
and part of the roadway from the Port of San Francisco for Phase 1 of the Park. 
Part of the SFRA obligation is to conduct toxic evaluation studies in order to make 
an assessment of toxic contamination of the site and- to determine extent of 
remediation work. Based on our discussions with SFRA staff, the Budget Analyst 
believes that $25,000 of the toxic studies for Rincon Point Park could await funding 
to the following fiscal year. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends a 
reduction of $25, 000. 

Hunters Point Shipyard Planning and Related Studies ($300,000) 

These funds are to be utilized for physical land use and economic planning, 
environmental impact analysis of the selected planning alternative, plus further 
subsurface toxic analysis which may be required as a result of proposed new 
project uses and options for the former Hunters Point Shipyard. Negotiations are 
expected to be concluded in October 1992 between the City and the U. S. Navy 
which encourages the timely completion of these studies. The Budget Analyst 
concurs with the budgeted amounts. 

Hunters Point Shipyard Consultant Services ($175,750) 

These funds involve services by City departments, including City Attorney 
($21,250 - .25 FTE), City Planning ($54,500 - 1.05 FTE), Mayor's Office of Business 
and Economic Planning - MOBEP ($20,000 - .25 FTE), Port ($55,000 - .33 FTE) and 
Department of Public Health ($25,000 - .33 FTE). The SFRA will contract for the 
services of these City departments by Letter Agreement. The City departments 
will assist the SFRA to identify the amount of staff resources required to negotiate 
lease and land agreements with the Navy, prepare toxic and land use analysis, 
manage dry-docks and piers, administer buildings and land, and oversee the 
planning and development of the 550 acre parcel. There are potential savings to 
the City Planning ($54,500), MOBEP ($20,000), and the Port ($55,000) budgets if 
these departments use existing staff for the designated work rather than hiring 
additional staff to accomplish the work requested by the SFRA. Until it is decided 
how these services will be funded, either from funds already approved in 
departmental budgets or from the SFRA, the Budget Analyst recommends that an 
amount of $129,500 be reserved. 

South of Market (SOM) Consultant Services ($315,000) 

These services include $150,000 for the preparation of a supplemental 
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), $75,000 for civil engineering and related 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 

professional design services, $10,000 for appraisals and economic analysis on 
seven to ten residential properties and $80,000 for miscellaneous consulting 
services to formulate a housing strategy. The EIR ($150,000) is needed for a 
proposed SOM Plan Amendment that would expand the existing redevelopment 
project area to facilitate additional housing, community facilities, and economic 
development activities. The Plan Amendment would also require Owner 
Participation Agreements on properties in the project area to facilitate the (1) 
rehabilitation of existing Single Room Occupancy (SRO) hotels and apartment 
buildings and the (2) development of new housing and commercial development. 
Since the consulting work calls for a supplemental EIR, the Budget Analyst 
recommends that the amount budgeted should be reduced by 20 percent or from 
$150,000 to $120,000 for a reduction of $30,000 because some of the research has 
already been completed in the original EIR and some of the work on the 
supplemental EIR can be done by in-house staff. 

The $75,000 for civil engineering represents 15 percent (2 percent for 
surveys, 8 percent for civil engineering, 2 percent for geotechnical and 3 percent 
for urban design) of a total estimated cost of $500,000 for public improvements. 
The Budget Analyst believes that 4 percent for civil engineering and 1 percent of 
the urban design, for a total 5 percent could be done by in house engineering and 
architectural staff for a savings of $25,000. Therefore, the Budget Analyst 
recommends a reduction of $25,000. 

The Budget Analyst concurs with the $10,000 budgeted for appraisals and 
economic analysis on the ten housing properties and believes that the $80,000 
budgeted for miscellaneous consulting services of Tenants and Owners 
Development Corporation (TODCO) could be reduced to $60,000 to formulate a 
housing strategy and develop a SRO management program based on more recent 
negotiations between SFRA and TODCO. Therefore, the Budget Analyst 
recommends a reduction of $20,000. 

South Bayshore Consultant Services ($400,000) 

SFRA has budgeted $150,000 for land use planning studies and urban 
design conceptual guidelines for a redevelopment area, and $250,000 for an 
Environmental Impact Report (EIR). As indicated earlier in our discussion of 
legal services for this project, South Bayshore remains a project in a preliminary 
planning status without a Board of Supervisors designated Project Survey Area. 
Because this project is in its early stages, the Budget Analyst believes that funds 
for detailed planning and environmental impact analysis can be reduced 50 
percent pending more definitive City policy to move forward with this project. 
This reduction from $400,000 to $200,000 would provide a savings of $200,000. In 
addition, the remaining $200,000 should be put on reserve pending action by the 
Board of Supervisors to designate a South Bayshore Project Survey Area. 
Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends a reduction of $200,000 and a reserve 
on the remaining $200,000. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

18 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 

A summary of the recommended savings in consultant services for SFRA 
project and economic development activities are as follows: 

Yerba Buena Center $ 30,000 

Rincon Point/South Beach 25,000 

South of Market 75,000 

South Bayshore 200.000 

Total $330,000 

In addition, a total of $329,500 for Hunters Point Naval Shipyard ($129,500) 
and for South Bayshore ($200,000) planning and economic development studies 
should be reserved. 

The FY 1992-93 SFRA budget makes reference to the McCarquodale limit on 
tax increment financing for the Western Addition A-2 Redevelopment Project. 
Currently, and as required to revise the McCarquodale limit, the SFRA has 
legislation (File 161-92-5) pending before the Finance Committee to increase the 
limit of tax allocation bonds for the Western Addition A-2 Project by $550,000. 
These funds would be expended for capital improvements and economic 
development assistance to the Western Addition Cultural Center. Board of 
Supervisors approval of this increase to the tax allocation bonds is required as the 
result of the McCarquodale limit. 

The FY 1991-92 budget for the Center for the Arts at Yerba Buena Gardens 
is funded from a portion of the Marriot Hotel Lease payments to the SFRA. Lease 
payment revenues which are not included in the Center for the Arts budget are to 
be reserved for the future maintenance and security of the Yerba Buena Gardens. 

At its meeting of June 30, 1992, the Finance Committee indicated it would 
review the Center for the Arts budget in October 1992 based on changes to the 
current 1992-93 budget that reflect the recent findings of the previously noted 
consulting firm, Melanie Beene and Associates. This firm has completed a 
management audit and, as previously noted in this Budget Analyst report, 
submitted several findings that would affect an amended budget for the Center for 
the Arts. Since an amended budget would consider changes related to $158,600 
currently budgeted for contractual services, $91,106 for a four percent contingency 
and $16,000 for miscellaneous business and project expenses, these items will be 
reviewed when the Center for the Arts submits its budget to the Finance 
Committee for a review in approximately October, 1992. 

The FY 1991-92 budget identifies the hiring of seven new positions as 
follows: 

Communications Assistant (1) 
Development Assistant (1) 
Manager of Institutional Gifts (1) 
Director of Programs (2) 
Program Assistant (1) 
Operations Assistant (1) 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 

Ms. Leslie Mieko advises that $260,000 was budgeted for these seven 
positions in 1991-92 and a total of $91,500 was actually expended leaving a residual 
total of $168,500. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends a reduction of 
$168,500. 

Construction plans for the East Garden on Central Block 2 in the Yerba 
Buena Center Redevelopment Project is budgeted for $2,300,000. This construction 
is an integral part of the total Central Block 2 currently under construction (see 
attached map). Because the East Garden is located between the Visual Arts 
Building and the Theater, directly across the street from the Museum of Modern 
Art (MOMA), and adjacent to the Esplanade, the Budget Analyst concurs it 
should be completed in conjunction with the other improvements scheduled for 
Central Block 2 (CB 2) for the following reasons: 

• The completion of all construction would minimize disruption to the 
operations of the Moscone Center expansion underneath the SFRA 
improvements. Even if the garden is not built in conjunction with the other 
improvements, substantial costs will have to be incurred to cover the 
Moscone roof. This covering would then, at a later date, have to be removed 
or modified in order to install the garden as currently designed, thus 
significantly increasing the total cost. 

• The East Garden has an important relationship with the Visual Arts 
Building and the Theater of the Center for the Arts which is scheduled to be 
opened in October 1993. The East Garden is designed so that it can be used 
as a performance and display space for the Center for the Arts. 

• The East Garden has a critical visual relationship to the Museum of 
Modern Art. 

• The East Garden is adjacent to the Esplanade on CB 2 and represents an 
important physical link between the Esplanade and the Center for the Arts. 
If the construction of the East Garden were delayed, the circulation of 
people in the area would be negatively affected. 

• SFRA reports that the bidding atmosphere for public improvements is 
currently very positive due to the slowdown in private construction, and, 
therefore, delay of the facility would likely result in increases in the total 
cost. 

• Leaving this portion of CB 2 incomplete would negatively affect the 
SFRA's ability to market the parcels across the street which are no longer 
under option to Olympia and York. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27 ,1992 

Recommendations: 1. Reduce the proposed 1992-93 San Francisco 
Redevelopment Agency budget by $143,159 from $121,933,000 
to $121,789,841 as identified in Comment 1. These 
recommendations are subject to final review and 
acceptance or rejection by the Finance Committee during 
the budget review hearings on the Redevelopment Agency. 

2. Reduce the Prior Year Earnings/Savings Revenues by 
$876,000, from $14,804,000 to $13,928,000. Further, the 
Agency's 1992-93 budget should be amended to reduce 
Economic Development Expenditures by $876,000, from 
$7,602,000 to $6,726,000 as identified in Comment 2. 

3. Reserve $113,653 for salary for six clerical positions for 
the last six months of the fiscal year pending the results of a 
workload and classification study. 

4. Reserve $22,367 of mandatory fringe benefits for the six 
clerical positions. 

5. Reserve $3,450,000 of previously appropriated but unspent 
economic development funding of the proposed budget of 
$6,726,000 pending submission to the Board of Supervisors 
of an economic development implementation and/or 
strategic plan. 

6. Reserve $186,330 or 10 months funding pending a report 
to the Board of Supervisors of the decision of the Records 
Management Program Task Force to contract these 
services out. 

7. Although the Budget Analyst believes it would be more 
fiscally prudent in the long run to fund redevelopment 
activities on a pay-as-you-go basis instead of debt financing 
them, the current condition of the City's General Fund 
budget could not absorb the additional $49,578,375 
expenditure, as identified in Comment 4. As such, the 
Budget Analyst recommends approving the proposed 
$65,000,000 bond issuance for the purpose of financing 
Redevelopment Agency activities in FY 1992-93. 

8. Approve the proposed amendment to the Indebtedness 
Limitation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency 
and the City and County of San Francisco. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 27, 1992 



9. As a result of additional analysis of the 1992-93 San 
Francisco Redevelopment Agency budget, the Budget 
Analyst recommends the following reductions and 
reserves: 

a. Outside Legal Counsel and Related 

Contingency Fund Expenditures $571,000 

b. Consultant Services for Project 

and Economic Development Expenditures 330,000 

c. Center for the Arts costs 168.500 

Total additional reductions $1,069,500 

Additionally, reserve $329,500 in Planning and Economic 
Development Study Expenditures. 

10. Approve the proposed budget as amended. 



Harvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

22 



Attachment 




■f 



rofl vS A .. ~ DOCUMPNTR DEPT, 

> f u ' \rATFNDA R A<^>° NS 7«*w 

^ -^ CALENDAR JU( _ g x ^ 

It « k^ ^TfWA^^^^S^TTFF SAN ™ ANC,SC0 

FINANCE COMMITTEE Dl In , in , irrary 

== BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



PUBLIC LIBRARY 



///// 
WEDNESDAY, JULY 29, 1992 - 2:00 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

PRESENT: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, MIGDEN, HALLINAN 

ABSENT: SUPERVISOR GONZALEZ - ITEMS la and lb 

SUPERVISOR MIGDEN - ITEMS lc, Id, lh and 10 

CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 

NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 
counter in the Office of the Clerk, of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 

CONSENT CALENDAR 

1. All matters listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are considered to be 
routine by the Finance Committee, and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote 
of the Committee. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a 
member of the Committee or a member of the public so requests, in which event the 
matter shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a separate 
item. 

(a) File 138-92-5 . [Grant - Federal Grant] Resolution authorizing the District 
Attorney of the City and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and 
expend grant funds in the amount of $87,443 made available through the 
California Office of Criminal Justice Planning for a project entitled "Gang 
Violence Suppression Program" for the twelve month period July 1, 1992 
through June 30, 1993 and agreeing to provide cash match in the amount of 
$9,716. (District Attorney) 

ACTION: Amendment of the Whole prepared in Committee. Recommended as 
amended. New title: "Authorizing the District Attorney of the City 
and County of San Francisco to apply for, retroactively, accept and 
expend grant funds in the amount of $87,443, which includes indirect 
costs $4,627 based on 5 percent of personnel costs and operating 
expenses, made available through the California Office of Criminal 
Justice Planning for a project entitled "Gang Violence Suppression 
Program" for the twelve-month period of July 1, 1992 through June 
30, 1993 and agreeing to provide cash match in the amount of 
$9,716." 



(b) File 143-92-3 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Chief of 
Police of the City and County of San Francisco to apply for, accept and expend 
funds in the amount of $121,271 made available through the Office of Criminal 
Justice Planning for a project entitled "Gang Suppression, Apprehension and 
Prevention"; and agreeing to provide cash match in the amount of $12,127. 
(Police Department) 

ACTION: Amendment of the Whole prepared in Committee. Recommended as 
amended. New title: "Authorizing the Chief of Police of the City 
and County of San Francisco to apply for, retroactively, accept and 
expend funds in the amount of $121,271, which includes indirect 
costs of $6,352 based on 5 percent of personnel costs and operating 
expenses, made available through the Office of Criminal Justice 
Planning for a project entitled "Gang Suppression, Apprehension and 
Prevention"; and agreeing to provide cash match in the amount of 
$12,127." 

(c) File 146-92-52 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the 
Department of Public Health, AIDS Office, to apply for a continuation grant of 
$2,500,000, which includes in indirect costs based on twenty percent of 
personnel costs, from the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers 
for Disease Control, to continue funding AIDS Surveillance Project. 
(Department of Public Health) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

(d) File 152-92-1.1 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Sheriff's 
Department of the City and County of San Francisco to accept and expend 
$166,622 in funds from the State of California Board of Corrections for the 
Standards and Training of Local Corrections Programs; stipulating adherence 
to standards for recruitment and training established by the Board of 
Corrections, waiving any indirect costs; companion measure to File 152-92-1. 
(Sheriff) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

(e) File 101-90-121.1 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, 
Water Department/1991 Series A Revenue Bond, in the of amount 10.5 million, 
for San Andreas Pipeline No. 3 Relining Project. (Water Department) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to Call of the Chair. 

(f) File 101-91-10.1 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, 
Department of Public Health/Division of Mental Health and San Francisco 
General Hospital (1987 Mental Health Facility Improvement Bond), in the 
amount of $21,624,000 (S.J. Amoroso Construction Company, contractor), for 
the construction of the Mental Health Skilled Nursing Facility and release of 
an additional amount of $972,000 in interest earnings for construction 
contingency. (Department of Public Health) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Release of $20,194,487 recommended. Filed. 



(g) File 147-92-2.1 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the City 

Librarian to accept and expend funds not to exceed $696,579 available through 
the California State Library from Title II of the Library Services and 
Construction Act for Public Library construction, which includes indirect costs 
of the amount of $43,997 or five percent of the total; companion measure to 
File 147-92-2. (Public Library) 
(Cont'd from 7/15/92) 

ACTION: Amended. (See file for details.) Recommended as amended. New 
title: "Authorizing the City Librarian to accept and expend funds 
not to exceed $696,579 available through the California State 
Library from Title II of the Library Services and Construction Act 
for Public Library construction, which includes indirect costs of the 
amount of $34,829 based on five percent of the total and a required 
match in the amount of $696,579; placing $456,750 on reserve." 

(h) File 147-92-4 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the execution of a 
grant contract with the California State Library for the award of a grant of 
Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act funds, which contract provides 
for the State to be indemnified and held harmless from all claims or damages 
which may arise in relation to the contract. (Public Library) 
(Cont'd from 7/15/92) 

ACTION: Recommended. 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

2. File 100-92-5 . Hearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the revenue 
of the City and County of San Francisco. (Supervisor Migden) 

(Continued from 7/22/92) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to August 5, 1992, meeting. 

3. File 25-92-22 . [Contracting Out City Services - Police Department] Resolution 
concurring with the Controller's certification that janitorial services can be 
practically performed for San Francisco Police Department facilities by private 
contractor for lower cost than similar work services performed by City and County 
employees. (Police Department) 

(Cont'd from 7/15/92) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to August 12, 1992, meeting. 

4. File 97-92-42 . [Emergency Medical Services Fund] Ordinance amending 
Administrative Code, by amending Section 10.117-73, to require that the Emergency 
Medical Services Fund be continued using penalty revenues pursuant to Government 
Code Sections 76000 and 76104, to require that the moneys in such fund be payable 
only for the purposes specified in Government Code Section 76104, and to make 
changes pursuant to recent amendments to Health and Safety Code Sections 
1797.98a through 1797. 98g. (Municipal Court) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to August 12, 1992, meeting. 



5. File 97-92-43 . [Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund] Ordinance amending 
Administrative Code, by amending Section 10.117-108, to establish the Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 76102, to 
require that the moneys in such fund be payable only for the purposes set forth in 
Government Code Section 76102, and to renumber Charter Section 6.311 to 6.306. 
(Municipal Court) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to August 12, 1992, meeting. 

6. File 97-92-43.1 . [Disbursement of the additional penalties] Resolution providing for 
the disbursement of the additional penalties assessed in criminal cases pursuant to 
Government Code Section 76000, establishing a Courthouse Construction Fund 
pursuant to Government Code Section 76100, establishing an Automated Fingerprint 
Identification Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 76102, continuing an 
Emergency Medical Services Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 76104, and 
imposing an additional penalty on all parking offenses to support the Courthouse 
Construction Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 76000; companion measure 
to File Nos. 97-92-42, 97-92-43 and 97-92-44. (Municipal Court) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to August 12, 1992, meeting. 

7. File 97-92-44 . [Courthouse Construction Fund] Ordinance amending Administrative 
Code, by amending Section 10.117-35, to rename the "Courthouse Temporary 
Construction Fund" the "Courthouse Construction Fund", to require that surcharges 
on filing fees in the Municipal and Superior Courts and penalty assessments provided 
in Government Code Section 76000 be deposited in such fund, and to require that the 
moneys deposited in such fund be used only for the purposes set forth in Government 
Code Sections 76000, 76100 and 76238. (Municipal Court) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to August 12, 1992, meeting. 

8. File 97-92-44.1 . [Courthouse Construction Fund] Resolution renaming the 
Courthouse Construction Fund and continuing the surcharge on filing fees in Civil 
and Probate actions in the Superior Court and in civil actions in the Municipal Court 
as provided in Government Code Section 76238 and Section 10.117-35 of the San 
Francisco Administrative Code, to assist in the acquisition, rehabilitation, 
construction, and financing of courtrooms or of a courtroom building or buildings 
containing facilities necessary or incidental to the operation of the justice system in 
the City and County of San Francisco; companion measure to File 97-92-44.1. 
(Municipal Court) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to August 12, 1992, meeting. 

9. File 27-92-5 . [Airport - Lease Modification] Ordinance approving Modification No. 
1 of lease agreement between City College of San Francisco and City and County of 
San Francisco, acting by and through its Airports Commission. (Airports Commission) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

10. File 47-92-5 . [Garage Lease Documents] Ordinance approving and adopting 
Polk-Bush Garage legal documents and authorization for management agreement. 
(Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: Continued to August 5, 1992, meeting (at the request of department). 



11. File 101-92-5 . [Government Funding] Ordinance appropriating $9,916, Department 
of Public Works, for capital improvement project (Hall of Justice Parking Lot 
Expansion) and certifying $9,916 from capital improvement project (Hall of Justice 
Parking Lot Expansion), to cover overage above ten percent of contracted amount 
pursuant to provisions of Charter Section 7.203; providing for ratification of action 
previously taken. RO #92031 (Controller) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

12. File 170-92-9 . [Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds] Resolution amending and restating 
Resolution No. 542-88, adopted July 17, 1988, Resolution No. 677-88, adopted 
August 29, 1988 and Resolution No. 605-91, adopted July 15, 1991, providing for the 
issuance of not to exceed $385,000,000 aggregate principal amount of City and 
County of San Francisco Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1992, curing 
certain ambiguous provisions, adding to the covenants of the City, authorizing Sales 
Certificate and appointing escrow agents; companion measure to File 170-92-9.1. 
(Chief Administrative Officer) 

ACTION: Amendment of the Whole adopted. Recommended as amended. 

13. File 170-92-9.1 . [Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds] Resolution authorizing and 
directing the sale of not to exceed $385,000,000 aggregate principal amount of City 
and County of San Francisco Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1992, 
authorizing the publication of official notice of sale relating thereto; approving the 
form of the official statement; and authorizing official action; companion measure 
to File 170-92-9. (Chief Administrative Officer) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

14. File 186-92-2 . [Polk/McAllister City Office Building] Resolution authorizing Chief 
Administrative Officer to negotiate for development of new city office building and 
to accept and expend donation of funds to offset city costs incurred through 
negotiations. (Chief Administrative Officer) 

ACTION: Amended on page 1, line 3, and on page 2, line 2, after "expend", by adding 
"subject to approval of Finance Committee". Recommended as amended. 
New title: "Authorizing Chief Administrative Officer to negotiate for 
development of new city office building and to accept and expend, subject 
to approval of Finance Committee, donation of funds to offset city costs 
incurred through negotiations." 



->s 



on- 



CITYAND COUNTY 




Public Library, (Documents <Dept. 

JLTmQ Gtrrv%gtft 
/ 

OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 

July 27, 1992 



TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst - 

SUBJECT: July 29, 1992 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item la - File 138-92-5 



DOCUMFMtq ncD T 
JUL 2 9 1992 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Department: 
Item: 

Grant Amount: 

Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 
Project: 
Description: 



District Attorney 

Resolution authorizing the District Attorney to apply for, 
accept and expend a State grant, and agreeing to provide a 
cash match. 

$87,443, plus a required local cash match of $9,716 for a total 
proposed program cost of $97,159. 

July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

California Office of Criminal Justice Planning (OCJP) 

District Attorney's Gang Violence Suppression Program 

This would be the ninth year of funding for this State 
mandated program (Chapter 3.5 of the California Penal 
Code, commencing Section 13826). For the past eight years, 
the program has had City departments such as the District 
Attorney's Office working independently to combat gang 
violence. The 1992-93 program differs from the previous 
Gang Violence Suppression Programs in that it is now a 
multi-component program and requires the joint cooperation 
of the District Attorney's Office, the Police Department, the 
San Francisco Unified School District, the Adult Probation 
Department, and community boards in suppressing gang 
violence. 

The District Attorney's Gang Violence Suppression Program 
is designed to be crime specific, focusing on the vertical 
prosecution of all adult gang members involved in gang- 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



related activities, and to coordinate the juvenile prosecution 
of related gang members. Gang members over the age of 18 
are prosecuted as adults, but juveniles may be prosecuted as 
adults based on the severity of the crime. A vertical 
prosecution uses one prosecutor per case, from initiating the 
charges or authorizing warrants, through the Municipal 
and/or Superior Courts, until the case is adjudicated. The 
staff prosecutor will also be an integral part of the Gang 
Event Response Team, thereby being on-call 24 hours per day, 
so as to work with the investigating agencies before and after 
arrests are made on gang violence cases. 

The program's primary objectives include: (1) assuring 
focused, in-depth gang-related investigations and 
prosecutions; (2) increasing the prosecution of targeted gang 
leadership for prosecutions for conspiracy and criminal 
street gang membership; (3) increasing the conviction rate 
for the most serious gang-related charges; and (4) increasing 
the continuous incarceration rate and generally reducing the 
time between filing of charges and convictions of gang 
members. 



Project Budget Personnel FTEs Salaries 



8182 Head Attorney 


0.07 


$ 7,141 




8180 Principal Attorney 


0.65 


61,651 




8132 Investigative Asst. 


0.10 


3,837 




Subtotal Salaries 


0.82 




$72,629 


Mandatory Fringe Benefits 






16.678 


Subtotal Personnel Costs 






$89,307 


Operating Expenses 








Travel (one grant-related two 


day 






conference in Southern California 






for one person) 




$ 705 




Audit 




972 




Office Supplies 




273 




Postage 




94 




Photocopies/Supplies 




396 




Telephone Services 




574 




Publications 




211 




Subtotal Operating Expenses 




3,225 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



Memo to Finance Co mmi ttee 
July 29, 1992 



Indirect Costs 

Total Program Budget 
Less required match 
Total Proposed Grant 



$ 4.627 

$97,159 

9.716 

$87,443 



Required Match: 



Indirect Costs: 



Comments: 



The required match of $9,716 has been included in the 
District Attorney's budget for FY 1992-93, to be funded 
through the General Fund. The State OCJP requires that 10 
percent of the total program budget of $97,159 be matched at 
the local level. 

$4,627 or 5 percent of $92,532 (Personnel + Operating 

Expenses). 

1. Ms. Bridget Bane of the District Attorney's Office reports 
that if the proposed State grant of $87,443 is reduced or 
terminated, the result would be a reduction of District 
Attorney staff. As noted above, the proposed grant would 
fund .82 FTEs. 

2. The proposed grant is one of two Gang Violence 
Suppression Programs included in this Report to the Finance 
Committee, as follows: 



Item 


File Number 1 


3rant Amount 


District Attorney * 
Police 

Total 


138-92-5 
143-92-3 


$87,443 

121.271 

$208,714 



* The subject of the proposed resolution. 

3. The application deadline for this grant was June 3, 1992. 
Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively authorize the District Attorney's Office to apply 
for the proposed grant, since the District Attorney's Office 
has already applied for this grant. Ms. Janet Salyer of the 
District Attorney's Office advises that as of the writing of this 
report, the District Attorney's Office has not been notified as 
to the exact amount of the proposed State grant. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

3 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

4. The $87,443 includes indirect costs of $4,627 in the grant 
budget. Since the indirect costs were not mentioned in the 
title of the proposed resolution and specific indirect costs 
were not noted in the body of the proposed resolution, the 
proposed resolution should be amended to include indirect 
costs of $4,627 in both the title and the body of the proposed 
resolution. 

5. Attached is a copy of the Summary of Grant Request form, 
as completed by the District Attorney's Office. The $97,159 
amount shown in the attachment includes the grant amount 
of $87,443 and the local match amount of $9,716. 

6. The District Attorney's Office has completed a Disability 
Access Checklist, which is in the file. 

Recommendation: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to retroactively authorize 
the District Attorney's Office to apply for the proposed grant 
and to include indirect costs of $4,627 in both the title and the 
body of the proposed legislation. 

2. Approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



l l"iin.n_ 




"^SESSrlfl^teim 



ion to a) 



.. n — „. * » ' — worn inc pcnod of u/ 
to provide Gang Viol^nr^ ^ -pp ^ess ion Program" 

1L. Smpjuizji (c—a^j^j^^^ . services. 

^^IS^^^^gg^jg^^W^, a state undated project ^ San 

f-™"- hn rrnn I , , L ~ t m n l ri - .' ._ . hp prorram h a ^ n „ r ~ h anf „| h „^— ,,„ » 



-'Ivltles and depirving 



toTHr^l^S^I^ as well as valuable 

i^^r^Rnaln^^ 



prosecution be reduced or terminated. 



Grant Amount 
Personnel 
Equipment 
•Contract Svc. 
Mat. & Supp. 

Facllltles/Space 

Other 

Indirect Costs 



V I . Ptf» _Procf^ln C 



XIL — PersQmui 
F/T CSC - 
P/T CSC 
Contractual 



Approved fr T 




source(s) of tJSXS'X^ *F*g J^S? 9 ^^^ P aid ^ the District Attorneys 
^^^^^^csx^p, 07ttJ worklDc pMnUnt oo |hb craft5neral y Fund 



ava i 1 abTeT 
1ZUI *-CfliiU*aiul_5Er»lcc5; O p <„ B | d 



ingent upon continued' source of funding 




Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Item lb - File 143-92-3 

Department: Police Department 

Item: Resolution authorizing the Chief of Police to apply for, accept 

and expend a State grant, and agreeing to provide a cash 
match. 

Grant Amount: $121,271, plus a required local cash match of $12,127 for a 
total proposed program cost of $133,398. 

Grant Period: July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993 

Source of Funds: California Office of Criminal Justice Planning (OCJP) 

Project: San Francisco Police Department's Gang Suppression, 

Apprehension and Prevention Program 

Description: This would be the seventh year of funding for this State 

mandated program (Chapter 3.5 of the California Penal 
Code, commencing Section 13826). For the past six years, the 
program has been known as the Gang Violence Suppression 
Program, with City departments such as the Police 
Department working independently to combat gang violence. 
The proposed program differs from the Gang Violence 
Suppression Program in previous years in that it has grown 
into a multi-component program and now requires the joint 
cooperation of the Police Department, the District Attorney's 
Office, the San Francisco Unified School District, the Adult 
Probation Department, and community boards in efforts to 
suppress gang violence. 

The proposed grant funds would be primarily used to provide 
funding for overtime hours incurred by the Police 
Department's Gang Violence Suppression Unit and to 
purchase computer equipment linking the Police and Adult 
Probation Departments with the Oakland Police 
Department's sophisticated gang information computer 
system. One of the features of Oakland's GREAT computer 
system is that photographs of suspected gang members can 
be transmitted over the system. Police Department staff 
would continue efforts to suppress gang activities, proactively 
gather gang intelligence, and interact with community based 
organizations, including the public schools, to provide 
alternatives to gang membership for youths. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUIM SET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Project Budget 



Amount 
Personnel (Overtime Hours) 

1 Lieutenant @ 168 hours @ $48.52/hr.) $ 8,151 

2 Sergeants @ 168 hours @ $42.66/hr.) 14,334 
4 Inspectors @ 168 hours @ $42.66/hr.) 28,668 
10 Officers @ 168 hours @ $35.62/hr.) 59,842 

2 Clerks @ 120 hours @ $22.24/hr.) 5.338 

Total Personnel Costs $116,333 

Operating Expenses 

OCJP Training $ 840 

OCJP Audit 1,334 

Telephone (monthly cellular service) 1,200 
1 LAN Computer Upgrade and Link 

to Oakland Police Dept. w/ 

Photographic Capability 3,095 

1 Video Camera 1,000 

3 Computer Upgrades 1,785 
Misc. Electronic Attachments 100 
Computer Usage Costs 1.359 

Subtotal Operating Expenses 10,713 



Required Match: 
Indirect Costs: 

Comments: 



Indirect Costs 

Total Program Budget 
Less required match 
Total Proposed Grant 



6.352 



$133,398 

12.127 

$121,271 



$12,127, or 10 percent of the total grant award of $121,271, 
included in the Police Department's FY 1992-93 budget. 

$6,352 or 5 percent of Personnel and Operating Expenses of 
$127,046 (see Comment No. 1). 

1. The body of the proposed resolution, but not the title, states 
that indirect costs of $6,273 or 5 percent of the total project cost 
are included in the grant's budget. However, the Police 
Department confirms that the indirect costs are actually 
$6,352, which is 5 percent of $127,046 (Personnel Costs + 
Operating Expenses). In addition, the word "costs" is 
missing after the word "indirect" in the body of the proposed 
resolution. Therefore, the proposed resolution should be 
amended to state in the title and the body of the legislation 
that indirect costs of $6,352 are included in the grant's 
budget. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



2. The application deadline for this grant was June 3, 1992. 
Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively authorize the Police Department to apply for the 
proposed grant, since the Police Department has already 
applied for this grant. Officer Sandi Bargioni of the Police 
Department reports that as of the writing of this report, the 
Police Department has not been notified as to the exact 
amount of the proposed State grant. 

3. The proposed grant is one of two related gang suppression 
grants included in this Report to the Finance Committee, as 
follows: 

Item File Number Grant Amount 

District Attorney 138-92-5 $ 87,443 

Police * 143-92-3 121.271 

Total $208,714 

* The subject of the proposed resolution. 

4. Officer Bargioni advises that the salaries and overtime pay 
of Sergeants and Inspectors within the Police Department 
are identical. 

5. Officer Bargioni reports that it is a high priority for the 
Police Department's Gang Violence Suppression Unit and 
the Adult Probation Department to share more gang-related 
information through computer linkages with the Oakland 
Police Department. The $7,339 in computer-related costs 
listed above will enable the Police Department to establish 
these computer linkages. Both the San Francisco and 
Oakland Police Departments believe such linkages will 
improve their effectiveness in suppressing gang activities, 
since the gangs in San Francisco and Oakland work 
together, committing crimes in both localities. 

6. Officer Bargioni advises that the $1,200 in cellular 
telephone expenditures are only service charges for existing 
cellular telephones and not for the purchase of additional 
telephones. The cellular phones are needed as 
communication devices for Investigators during 
surveillances which lead to gang raids and arrests. 

7. The $121,271 in proposed grant funds, not including the 
City match, for FY 1992-93 is $30,660 or approximately 34 
percent more than the FY 1991-92 Gang Violence 
Suppression Program grant award of $90,611. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

8. Attached is a copy of the Summary of Grant Request form, 
as completed by the Police Department. 

9. The Police Department has completed a Disability Access 
Checklist, which is in the file. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to retroactively authorize 
the Police Department to apply for the proposed grant and to 
include indirect costs of $6,352 in both the title and the body of 
the proposed legislation. 

2. Approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



"ent- No. 



-^-SummaiXJiLGr t Reonest 



Rev. 4/10/90 



Grattor OFFICE OF CRIM^ AWUSTICE .PLANNING SAu FRANCISCO POLTcfTdEPT 
Contact Perso, RAY JOHNSON ?' V '. S '° n GAN 7, TASK FORCE ^ ' 



Address 1130 K STREET 

"SACRAMEN TO, CA 9 bB14 
Amount Requested S 121,271.00 

7/1/92 — I 67307TJ 



Section 



Contact PersoT S: ^ICHKE Z 
Telephone * 15 553 " J 



Ttrm: From 

Health Commission 



Application Deadline j^fZE^ 
Notification Expected"* 



Board or Supervisors: Finance Committee 
Full Board 



10 Provide gang violen c e suppression/ prev entio n 

II . Summ ary <c-~w.~-.~_ B ^. m IZZ~~~ " sexvices - 



There has been an escalation in gan g recruitment, gang related shooting 
robberies , aggravat e d assaults ana -gib] i | , m I n .1, 1 ., shoo tings , 

exists a need to w o rk rln^iy . u ,"i. g^ ,, r - ... . LZlZZ~f^ -__. " e ~ 

involvement a.oniSg^^^^^ r un^te-, m d-^ m ^^ ang 
gang members, 



-elder 



ILL Qutcomp^/Ob le rt|vc ; 



S5^£S*BiS32£!!5; '-* — by can, T as k F orce 

V. Financial Tnfnrmotf^. 



CaL A Col, r 

Two Ye»r. Ago p„ t Ye«/Orig 

Grant Amount j 40 ' 000 ' 121,564 
Personnel l^a,655. 



. Equipment 

' ^Contract Svc 1,400. 

Mat. & Supp. 2,000. 

FacIHtles/Space . 

OtherfTravel) 9T5~1 

Indirect Costs /,000. 

33, Data p rTTrr „ [nr 

(can. fadwU ilm) 

yjL — Ptrsonnfj 
F/T CSC 
P/T CSC 
Contractual 



b,uyu 



Col, c 
Propoied 

133,398 
lib, JJb' 



Col, n 

Change 



Reo. Mafrh . 

Col A&B 25% 
Ql C 10% 





Source(s) of non-grant funding for salaries of C<tC , m . 

__^^^^^ of CSC employees working part-time on this grant- 

N/A 



IL!T'"°^™ ;;; '" rTr ""° ;7 '' ; ^^ 




«■■?•. > hi f-m,..., |,.,„) 



10 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Item lc - File 146-92-52 
Department: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH), 
AIDS Office 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health to 
apply for a continuation grant, which includes indirect costs 
based on 20 percent of personnel costs, from the Centers for 
Disease Control to continue funding the AIDS Surveillance 
Project. 

$2,500,000 

January 1, 1993 through December 31, 1993 

Federal Department of Health and Human Services, 
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) 

AIDS Surveillance Project 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved a resolution 
(File 146-91-85) which authorized the Department of Public 
Health to apply for, accept and expend a continuation of a 
Federal grant of $2,468,345 for the ADDS Surveillance Project 
during calendar year 1992, including indirect costs of 
$268,122 based on 20 percent of personnel costs. The DPH 
actually received a grant amount of $1,962,465, including 
indirect costs of $214,750, to fund this project, which 
constituted the second year of the second 5-year CDC project 
period. 

The purpose of the proposed grant of $2,500,000 is to continue 
funding the AIDS Surveillance Project in 1993, which 
provides the resources to measure and track the AIDS 
epidemic in San Francisco. The AIDS Surveillance Project 
generates all meaningful epidemiologic data about the 
nature of the AIDS epidemic. The DPH is still in the process 
of negotiating with the CDC regarding the specifics of how 
the proposed grant of $2,500,000 should be spent. In previous 
years, the DPH has used the CDC monies to fund both in- 
house and contractual services. The CDC has indicated in 
preliminary discussions that the CDC may request that the 
DPH perform more surveillance work on an in-house basis 
and contract out to a lesser extent in 1993. 

The proposed grant represents the third year of the second 5- 
year CDC project period. The budget for the proposed grant is 
still being developed, but the DPH advises that a detailed line 
item budget for the proposed grant will he submitted with the 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Department's request for authorization to accept and expend 
the proposed funds. 

Required Match: None. 

Indirect Costs: Not yet determined, but to be 20 percent of personnel costs. 



Comments: 1. Mr. Tim Piland of the DPH reports that at the time of this 

writing, no 1993 budget for the project is available, but that it 
will be provided when the DPH requests the Finance 
Committee's authorization to accept and expend the grant 
funds. 

2. Mr. Piland reports that the application deadline for the 
proposed grant is August 17, 1992 and that notification of the 
grant award is expected to occur by approximately October 15, 
1992, at which time the DPH will request that the Board of 
Supervisors authorize the DPH to accept and expend the 
proposed grant. 

4. As previously noted, the prior year's grant was funded in 
the amount of $1,962,465. The CDC has informed the DPH 
that the CDC plans to give the DPH an augmentation to the 
1992 grant of $49,514, for a total grant amount of $2,011,979 for 
the 1992 calendar year. The DPH plans to request that the 
Board of Supervisors authorize the DPH to apply for, accept 
and expend the augmentation to the 1992 grant of $49,514 in 
August, 1992. This proposed request of $2,500,000 in 1993 
CDC monies represents an increase of $488,021, or 
approximately a 24 percent increase over the anticipated 1992 
total grant amount of $2,011,979. 

5. Attached is the Summary of Grant Request, as prepared 
by the DPH. 

6. The DPH has completed a Disability Access Checklist, 
which is in the file. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



jTen nn y,ninmi>sn)p - ouuimnrv m t t ran[ m eatiest 



Dept of Health ai uman Srvs 

Grantor Cpnrpr.q for Qjseasg Control ' Division ■ CO/AIDS Div 

Contact Perso; Nealeen Austin/Jeff Efird Section 

Address 255 Ease Paces Ferry Rd, NE Contact Person 

Atlanta. GA 30305 Telephone 

Amount Requested S 2,500.000 Application Deadline 8/17/92 

Term: Fro- 1/1/93 To 12/31/93 Notification Expected 10/15/92 

Health Commission . Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 



( Rav. -/1Q/9Q 



AIDS 


; Office 


on Tim 


Piland 


554- 


■9132 



Full Board 



J. Ttem Descr-ntinn: Request to (apply for) (gxgppggetatxpgffll) a fne*) (continuation) ^gaa$B^)c^p(ie^iSS^r5^ 
(Cni .?5»oi»->. -«> grant ^ ^ c amount f S 2. 5 M from the period of 1/1/93 to 12/31/93 

tnpmv-ide AIDS Surveillance Project services. 

SugUmXZI ' Cjcca afeinMy; :»cd i^txj^ai: e«=bcr * pro km4 Kr~icc3 tad pnmiJci ) 

This continuation grant will fund the third year of the current AIDS surveillance c ooperative 
agreement: it funds all AIDS/HIV surveillance and seroprevalence activities conduc ted by 
the AIDS Office. A detailed description of this year's activities will accompany t he 
request to accept and expend 1993 AIDS surveillance funding. 

TTT. Outcnmes/Ohiectives: 

The objective of the AIDS surveillance and seroprevalence activities is to generate 
meaningful epidemiologic data about the nature of the epidemic in order to identify 
and address AIDS/HIV disease trends and issues. 

TV. Effect*: of ?»cuicp>" nr Termination of The'? F.jMc- 
Failure to apply for these funds would significantly impair our ability to measure and 
track the AIDS epidemic in San Francisco; failure to apply for these funds would al so 
jeopardize future grant funding availability. 

V. Financial Information: 

Col. Jy Col. B Col. C Col. D Reo. Match Approved hv 

Two Ycirs Ago ?2si Ye»r/Orig. - Proposed Change 

Grant Amount 1 .685.616 2.468.345 2.500.000 

Personnel 1.112.330 1.689.171 

Equipment 11.298 



'Contract Svc. 210.008 208.107 BUDGET I S IN DEVEL OP MENT: A D ETAILED 

Mat. & Supp. 100,324 114.869 



Facilities/Space 30,189 53,185 LINE I TE M BUDGET W IL L BE SUBMI TT ED WITH 

Other 52,005 123,593 

Indirect Costs 180,760 268,122 THE RE QU EST TO ACC EPT AND EXPEND FUNDS. 

VT. Para Pmrfin" 



(u»o incl»4ui^x«) 1 1 . 298 

VTT. Personnel 

F/T CSC 24.75 31.50 TBD 

P/T CSC 



Contractual 5.00 6.75 TBD 



Source(s) of non-grant funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this grant: 
Nonp . 





Will grant 
No. 


funded 


employees 


be 


retained 


after 


(his 


grant 


terminates? 


If so. 


How? 






1YILL C"ntrart'iil S>r»ir><: Open Bid none _ Sole Source none l".^.^^ 



13 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Item Id - File 152-92-1.1 



Department 
Item: 



Grant Amount: 



Grant Period: 



Sheriff 

Resolution authorizing the Sheriffs Department to accept 
and expend $166,622 in funds from the State of California 
Board of Corrections for the Standards and Training of Local 
Corrections Programs, stipulating adherence to standards 
for recruitment and training established by the Board of 
Corrections and waiving any indirect costs. 

$166,622 

July 1, 1992 - June 30, 1993 



Source of Funds State of California Board of Corrections under Senate Bill (SB) 
924 

Project Standards and Training of Local Corrections and Probation 

Officers Program 

Description: The Board of Supervisors previously approved legislation 

authorizing the Sheriffs Department to retroactively apply 
for the proposed State grant funds in the amount of $166,622 
(File 152-92-1). The proposed grant funds would pay for State- 
certified training for Corrections Officers in the Sheriffs 
Department. The program which is operated by the State 
Board of Corrections, provides funds to improve and 
standardize the skills of Deputy Sheriff jail staff from entry- 
level staff to department heads. SB 924 authorized the State 
Board of Corrections to establish minimum standards for the 
selection and training of Deputy Sheriff jail staff and to certify 
the training courses to be taken by personnel participating in 
this program. 

The proposed subvention would fund a total of 370 personnel 
during the 1992-93 Fiscal Year. Total training hours would 
be 14,644 and would range from 24 hours of update training 
for experienced personnel to 200 hours of training for new 
personnel. Training costs are paid by this subvention and no 
matching funds are required. 

The major subject areas of training are listed below: 

Deputy Sheriff Jail Staff 

Psychological theory and diagnostic techniques 
Security and supervision of minors and adults 
Legal considerations 
Laws of evidence 

HOARD OF SUPKRV1SORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Emergency procedures (i.e. First Aid, CPR) 
Supervision of special inmates. 

Supervisory. Administrative Personnel 

Managing personnel problems 

Supervisory skills 

Legal aspects of personnel supervision 

Budgeting, accounting and fiscal management techniques 

Stress management 

Communication skills 

Legal updates (cases, statutory, administrative law) 

Applied management models 

Information systems 

Cost effectiveness analysis 

Community relations 



No. of Persons 
Served: 


Training for 370 personnel 




Project Budget 


Staff Hours Tuition Travel 


Per Salary 
Diem Replacement Total 




370 14,644 $18,690 $3,786 


$12,681 $131,465* $166,65 



Indirect Costs: 

Required Match: 
Comments: 



*The $131,465 completely reimburses the Department for staff time 
connected with the training program. 

None. The State Department of Corrections requires that all 
funds be used for direct training services. Therefore, the 
proposed resolution would waive indirect costs. 

None 

1. As noted above, the proposed grant has a start-up date of 
July 1, 1992. However, the Department has not, as yet, 
received any of the proposed grant funds. 

2. The proposed grant of $166,622 is approximately $10,148 or 
5.7 percent less than the final FY 1991-92 grant award of 
$176,770. 

3. Attached is the "Summary of Grant Request" as completed 
by the Sheriffs Department. 

4. A Disability Access checklist has been prepared by the 
Sheriffs Department for this proposed grant and is included 
in the file. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



HPK-^b-y^ WtU lti „ Attachment 

' »« fiPR-2S-*92 WED 11 = 53 ID:SFSD TRAINING UNIT TEL NO: 11484 P82 



Summary or Grant P "ui_ 1 Rev. 4/1 0/90 ] 



Gr»ttor California Bosrd of Corrections DlvUtoq S.F. Sheriff's Department 

C»bt»c( Person Nathaniel Reed Section Training 

Addre«» 500 Be'rcot Drive CqkIxi Person Sr. Deputy O'Callaqhcn 

Sacramento, CA 95814 TeUpfcooc (415) 5S3-960O 

Amount KtQUetUd $ S166, 672.00 Appllc.iloo Dc«dlfne 04/15/92 

Term:. From 07/01/92 To S213 &122 Noilflcatlon Eipcelcd 1_J 

Ht»kh Coramlsilon , ,__ . . . lio«rd of Supervltorir F|nan<« Committee 

F»U Board 



1, tlrm D«*crl»lloB; Request to (apply for) (accept and expend)* (new) (continuation) (»Uocaiion) (augmentation to a) 
tcw.^^v-**I tyrant in the amount of $166,622 froa Ok; period of 07/01/92 to 06/3 0/93 

ID provide Training | JcrvictJ. 

\1, fttimTnirTt ( C , i ■,<.■ ,. i n t , •^••c^.imtaM. «JH-I 
Funding provided .through me California Board of Corrections to Corrections agencies to provide 
state-certified training. This will be the thirteenth year of -participation In the" statewide ' 

training subvention. • 



UL PutcOTOIf/Q bUcttVcf; 

To ensure compliance with Minimum Jail Standards and the Penal Code. To provide standardized 
entry .level training and yearly updates for lourney level, management level end adalnistrstive 
level staffs 



TV. Effect ? of RcJoctlPn &r T«nmrnatkin afcJQtf&t fall— 

Inability to conply with state mandated training. 



V, Ftninetit •fhfot-pt^"- 

C?T. A CgL .3 Col, ,C Cot, D Rrg„,M»Kh AuBro „ P v 



Grant Amooct 212,682 

ftr<6bB«l N/A 

IqnJptaeat N/A 



•Contract Svc. N/A 



M»t* & Supp. , . N/A. 



Facilities/Spice * 'N/A 



Other . N/A , 



Indirect Cotli N/A 

S3N. P»ti Er_astog 

Ua»i i i i*»q N/A 

vn - , ttuaaad 

F/T CSC .. n/a , 

JVT CSC _ N/A 



Contrictua] n/A 



Col. B 
P»n YettfOrij. 
189,000* 


Col. C 
Fropotol 

166,622 
N/A 
N/A 
N/A 
N/A 
N/A 
N/A 
N/A 

N/A 


Cot, D 

Oujijc 


N/A 




N/A 




N/A 




N/A 




N/A 




N/A 




N/A 




K7A 




N/A 


N/A 
N/A 
N/A 




N/A 




N/A 





So»rct<s) cf non-grunt foadlnt for s»larlts or CSC employe** W6rV|o£ p»rt-tlrae oo tbU gjiLi: 

N'/A 



w »l cr«nt fuoJ.d employees be r«««lued «fier rbti £r.»t>t terminates? If so. How? 

HZA 



______ 

* Subsequent ly reduced Co $176,770. 

16 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Item le - File 101-90-121.1 

Department Water Department 

Item: Release of reserved funds for the San Andreas Pipeline No. 3 

Relining Project. 

Amount: $10.5 million 

Source of Funds: Water Department 1991 Series A Revenue Bonds 



Description: 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



On June 26, 1991 the Board of Supervisors approved a 
resolution (File 101-90-121) to appropriate $47,925,000 of Water 
Department 1991 Series A Revenue Bonds for the following 
projects: 

Calaveras Pipeline $11,300,000 

San Andreas Pipeline No. 3 Relining 15,000,000 

Three-Year Main Replacement 19,125,000 

Three-Year Service Renewals 2.500.000 

Total $47,925,000 

Of the $15 million appropriated for the San Andreas Pipeline 
No. 3 Relining, $10.5 million was reserved pending the 
identification of construction contractors. 

1. The Water Department has requested the release of the 
$10.5 million reserve so that the Public Utilities Commission 
(PUC) can proceed with the award of the project upon receipt 
of bids. According to Mr. Richard Brandt of the PUC, the 
Department anticipates advertising the contract August 6, 
1992, and Notice to Proceed is anticipated in early November, 
1992. 

2. Since bids have not been received and the contractors have 
not yet been selected, the $10.5 million should continue to be 
reserved pending the identification and cost details of the 
construction contractors and the MBE/WBE status of the 
contractors. 

Continue to reserve $10.5 million pending the identification 
and cost details of the construction contractors and the 
MBE/WBE status of the contractors. 



HOAKDOF SUPKKVISOHS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Item If -File 101-91-10.1 

Department Department of Public Health 

Item: Release of $21,624,000 of reserved funds for the construction of 

the Mental Health Skilled Nursing Facility, and the release of 
an additional amount of $972,000 in interest earnings for 
construction contingency. 

Amount: $22,596,000 

Source of Funds: 1987 Mental Health Facility Improvement Bonds 

Description: On June 26, 1991, the Board of Supervisors approved an 

ordinance (File 101-91-10) to appropriate $23 million of 1987 
Mental Health Facility Improvement Bonds for the 
construction of the Mental Health Skilled Nursing Facility. 
The Board of Supervisors placed $21,624,800 of the $23 million 
appropriation on reserve pending selection of a construction 
contractor and information regarding costs and the 
MBE/WBE status of the contractor. 

On June 10, 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved an 
ordinance (File 101-92-77) to appropriate $972,000 for 
construction contingency costs for the Mental Health Skilled 
Nursing Facility, and placed the total appropriation of 
$972,000 on reserve pending selection of a construction 
contractor and information regarding costs and the 
MBE/WBE status of the contractor. 

The proposed release of reserve would release the total 
appropriation of $972,000 (File 101-92-77), and would release 
$21,624,000 of the total $21,624,800 reserved (File 101-91-10), 
leaving $800 on reserve. 

Comments: 1. The DPH advises that the letter requesting the release of 

reserve contains an error, and DPH now requests that the 
entire $21,624,800 on reserve be released, or $800 more than 
requested (File 101-91-10). 

2. The Department of Public Works (DPW) issued Invitations 
for Bids for the construction of the Mental Health Skilled 
Nursing Facility in March 1992, and received six bids. 

3. The DPW has selected S.J. Amoroso Construction 
Company as the contractor for the proposed project. S.J. 
Amoroso is not a MBE or WBE firm, but the proposed 
contract would have at least 22.7 percent MBE subcontractor 
participation and 3.4 WBE subcontractor participation, 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



according to the DPW. S.J. Amoroso was selected based on its 
low bid of $17,321,487, the DPW advises. 

4. The budget for the total amount requested to be released is 
as follows: 

Construction Contract $17,321,487 

Construction Contingency (14 percent) 2,410,000 

Arts Enrichment Program 333,000 

Asbestos Monitoring 50,000 

Materials Testing 80.000 

TOTAL COST $20,194,487 

TOTAL REQUEST 22.596.000 

DIFFERENCE $2,401,513 

5. Because S.J. Amoroso's bid was lower than anticipated, 
$2,401,513 is available for additional improvements to the 
Mental Health Skilled Nursing Facility. According to Mr. 
Buker, the DPW anticipates requesting 1987 bond funds to 
provide additional services, including built-in furniture and 
a telephone system. Mr. Buker reports that a contractor for 
these additional improvements would be selected based on a 
competitive bid. The DPW would request the release of these 
outstanding funds at a later date from the Board of 
Supervisors when a contractor has been selected, Mr. Buker 
advises. 

6. Asbestos Monitoring, at $50,000, would be performed by the 
Bureau of Environmental Regulation and Management, a 
division of the DPW, Mr. Buker reports. Materials Testing, at 
$80,000, would be an expansion of an existing architectural 
contract with Kaplan, McLaughlin, and Diaz in association 
with Gordon Chong Associates, which was previously 
approved by the Board of Supervisors. 

7. In general, contingency costs equal 10 percent of contract 
costs rather than the 14 percent currently requested. Mr. Jim 
Buker of the DPW advises that the $17.3 million bid was lower 
than anticipated. Therefore, the DPW anticipates that 
contingency costs may be higher than usual. Mr. Buker 
further advises that DPW intends to negotiate with the 
contractor to perform $400,000 in maintenance upgrades in 

BOARD OF ST IPBRVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

order to lower long-term operating costs, to be funded from 
the $2.41 contingency costs. 

8. Although the total request for release is $22,596,000, the 
total construction costs and contingency fees for the proposed 
contract total $20,194,487. Therefore, $20,194,487 should be 
released, and $2,401,513 should continue to be reserved 
pending information regarding costs and the MBE/WBE 
status of the contractor. 

Recommendation: Release $20,194,487, and continue to reserve $2,401,513 
pending selection of additional contractors and information 
regarding costs and the MBE/WBE status of the contractor. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Item lg - File 147-92-2.1 

Note: This item was continued from the Finance Committee meeting on July 15, 
1992. 



Department: 
Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Grant Period: 
Description- 



Public Library 

Resolution authorizing the City Librarian to accept and 
expend funds not to exceed $696,579 available through the 
California State Library from Title II of the Library Services 
and Construction Act, which includes indirect costs in the 
amount of $43,997, or five percent of the total grant. 

Not to exceed $696,579 

Federal grant funds through the California State Library 

January, 1993 to April, 1995 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved legislation 
authorizing the Library to apply for the proposed grant funds 
in an amount not to exceed $879,935, (File 147-92-2). The 
Public Library advises that, in the interim, the State has 
notified the Department that the allocation will be in an 
amount not to exceed $696,579 or $183,356 less than the 
original not to exceed amount of $879,935. 

The Public Library advises that the proposed grant funds 
would be used as a match to expand the scope of renovation 
work for the Mission Branch Library. The Public Library has 
currently identified $859,829 in 1988 Library Improvement 
Bond Funds, $100,000 in Earthquake Safety Bond Program 
Phase II funds and $29,935 in General Fund monies 
(included in the 1992-93 budget) for a total of $989,764. The 
$989,764 will be used primarily to pay for seismic upgrading 
electrical work, handicapped accessibility and asbestos 
abatement. According to the Public Library, the proposed 
matching grant, which would bring the total amount 
available for renovation to $1,686,343, would be used to expand 
the scope of renovation work to include (1) expansion of the 
building to the property line to provide a 25 percent increase 
to the public area of the Mission Branch and to improve the 
quality of staff work spaces, (2) creation of a single level on 
the first floor to provide an additional enhancement to 
handicapped accessibility, (3) expansion of the Children's 
Department to provide for a reading room area and a 
separate area for special activities and (4) creation of an ana 
for tutoring and public access to microcomputer use. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Project Budget 




1988 Library 
Improvement 






Federal 


Bond 






Grant 


Funds and 






Funds 


General Funds 


Total 


Design Phase 








Programming 


$30,000 


$30,000 


$60,000 


Estimator 


5,000 


5,000 


10,000 


Bureau of Architecture 


30,000 


30,000 


60,000 


Structural Engineer 


20,000 


20,000 


40,000 


Mechanical Engineer 


10,000 


10,000 


20,000 


Electrical Engineer 


10,000 


10,000 


20,000 


Asbestos Investigator 


5,500 


5,500 


11,000 


Surveys 


1.500 


1.500 


3.000 


Subtotal 


$112,000 


$112,000 


$224,000 


Construction Phase 








Construction 


$384,815 


$679,473 $1,064,288 


Construction Management 60,000 


60,000 


120,000 


Permit Fees 


1,500 


1,500 


3,000 


Soil Tests 


5,000 


5,000 


10,000 


Art Enrichment 


10,000 


10,000 


20,000 


Asbestos Abatement 


16,500 


16,500 


33,000 


Contingency 


42.000 


75.356 


117.356 


Subtotal 


$519,815 


$847,829 $1,367,644 


Equipment 








Data Processing 








Equipment 


$29,935 


$29,935 


$59,870 


Indirect Costs 


$34,829 





$34,829 


Total 


$696,579 


$989,764 $1,686,343 


Required Match: $696,579. As reflected above, the Public Library has 


identifie 



$989,764 of previously appropriated 1988 Library 
Improvement bond funds and General Funds monies 
included in the 1992-93 budget that would be used as local 
matching funds, or $293,185 more than the $696,579 required 
amount of matching funds. 



Indirect Costs: 



$34,829 (see Comment #1) 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



22 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Comments: 1. The Public Library reports that the amount of $43,997 

included in the proposed legislation for indirect costs is 
incorrect. The correct amount for indirect costs is $34,829 as 
reflected in the Project Budget above, or five percent of the 
total grant award of $696,579. Therefore, the proposed 
legislation should be amended to include $34,829 instead of 
$43,997 for indirect costs in both the title and body. 

2. As noted above, the proposed grant has a required match 
of $696,579. This match is not reflected in the title or body of 
the proposed legislation. Therefore, the proposed legislation 
should be amended to reflect the $696,579 in the title and body 
of the proposed legislation. 

3. The Public Library has received approval from the 
Electronic Information Processing Steering Committee 
(EIPSC) for the purchase of the proposed data processing 
equipment in conjunction with the Public Library's three- 
year plan for upgrading its data system. As of the writing of 
this report, the Public Library was unable to provide the 
specific data processing to be purchased. Therefore, the 
Budget Analyst recommends that the $29,935 for data 
processing equipment be placed on reserve pending the 
Public Library providing details on the specific equipment to 
be purchased. 

4. The Public Library projects that the renovation on the 
Mission Branch Library will commence by January of 1994. 
The Library anticipates that an Invitation for Bids will be 
issued by December of 1993, to acquire the necessary 
construction contractor. The Budget Analyst recommends 
that the proposed legislation be amended to place $426,815 in 
grant monies for the construction contract ($384,815) and 
contingencies ($42,000) on reserve pending the Public Library 
submitting cost details and the MBE/WBE status of the 
contract. 

5. Attached is a grant summary, as prepared by the Public 
Library, for the proposed grant. 

6. The Public Library has prepared a Disability Access 
Checklist for this proposed grant, which is included in the 
file. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed legislation to include $34,829 instead 
of $43,997 for indirect costs in both the title and body of the 
proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

23 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



2. Amend the proposed legislation to reflect the required 
match of $696,579 in the title and body of the proposed 
legislation. 

3. Amend the proposed legislation to place a total of $456,750 
on reserve for (1) the construction contract and contingencies 
($426,815) pending the Public Library's submission of 
contractor cost details and the MBE/WBE status of the 
contract and (2) the data processing equipment ($29,935). 

4. Approve the legislation as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

24 



'■■-m-'U li;:::r.X :KUM b. t. fUBLll L1BKHKK Page 2 of 2 
Grant Application Information Form p. 2 
Term of grant: January 1993 - April 1995 . 



Date Department was notified of available funds: December 2, 1991 

Application Due Date: April 6, 1992 

Grant funding Guidelines and Options (from RFP, grant announcement 
or appropriations legislation)! 



The Library Services and Construction Act is intended to assist 'states to 
establish, extend And improve public library services in areas that are 
without these services or in which these services are inadequate. Inadequate 
facilities are those which do not meet locally adopted community service 
standards, do not provide easy access and use by physically handicapped 
persons, and do not provide for energy conservation or new technologies. 1992 
projects will be measured against the priority that the community serves a 
minority population which significantly exceeds the state average. These 
projects can be for additions to existing buildings and for remodeling 
existing library buildings to provide handicapped access, introduction of new 
technologies, or remodeling for safe working environments or energy 
conservation. To meet this priority, populations in the service area of the 
facility must have a combined Black, American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, Asian and 
Pacific Islander (all groups), and Spanish origin populations as defined in 
the I960 CeasuB, that is at least 50Z of the total population in the facility 
service area. This program requires a minimum of at least 50Z in non-Federal 
matching funds. This funding must be guaranteed. SFPL will provide this 
funding from the Library Improvement Bond. 
i" 

Assessment of Need for Grant Funding: 

Current service space in the branch library does not meet standards for a 
community the size of the Mission. The branch is limited in seating and 
shelving space. In addition, the current floor plan requires extra staffing 
and creates security and safety hazards. The adult book collection is not 
wheelchair accessible. There is not public meeting space. The Library 
Improvement Bond funding does not allow for site expansion or extensive 
remodeling. This funding would allow the Library to significantly expand the 
scope of work at the branch while greatly improving the facility* 6 for public 
use and safety. 



Department Head approva 



i. V*-*mr,G 



Kenneth E. D«wlin 
City Librarian 



25 



Uf-Ub-^ U.:::A»i i-KUM b. J. PUBLIC LIBRARY RxuacnmeuL 

Page 1 of 2 



File Number 



GRANT APPLICATION INFORMATION FORM 



To: The Board of Supervisors 
Attn: Clerk of the Board 

The following describes the grant referred to in the accompanying 
resolution. 

Department: library ________ . 

Contact person: Kathy Page . Phone*: 557-4210 

Project title: Mission Branch Expansion/Renovation 

Grant source: Library Services and Construction Act/ Title II (Fs dera 

Proposed ( x New / Continuation) Grant Project Summary: 

Under the Library Improvement Bonds of 1988, the San Francisco Public 
Library renovating and improving several branch libraries. This grant 
seeks to expand the scope of work for the Mission Branch Library, the 
Library's largest branch in the Southeast section of the city. The 
grant would enable Che branch public area to increase by 25% and 
significantly improve the quality of staff work spaces. Without the 
grant, the Library will be able to upgrade the building seismically and 
make it handicapped accessible, nor there will be an opportunity to imp 
the service level provided at this facility. 



Amount of grant funding applied foxre $696,579 

Maximum funding amount available: 



Required matching funds: . $989 ,764 

Number of positions created and funded: ^_^^ 

Amount to be spent on contractual services: 

Will contractual services be put out to bid? Yes 

26 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Item lh - File 147-92-4 



Note: This item was continued from the Finance Committee meeting on July 
15, 1992. 

Department Public Library 

Item: Resolution authorizing the execution of a grant contract with 

the California State Library for the award of a grant of 
Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act funds, which 
contract provides for the State to be indemnified and held 
harmless from all claims or damages which may arise in 
relation to the contract. 

Contract Amount: $2,484,573 

Source of Funds: California State Library Construction and Renovation Bond 
Act Grant 

Description: The Board of Supervisors previously approved legislation 

authorizing the Public Library to apply for, accept and 
expend California Library Construction and Renovation 
Bond Act grant funds in an amount not to exceed $3,100,000 
(File 147-91-5). The Public Library reports that the actual 
grant amount allocated by the State was $2,484,573. These 
grant funds are to be used to expand the scope of work for the 
Chinatown Branch Library which is, according to the 
Library, the City's busiest branch. The City is in the process 
of using 1988 Library Improvement Bond Funds to renovate 
and improve various branch libraries. The City will be using 
$1,582,492 in 1988 Library Improvement Bond funds at the 
Chinatown Branch primarily for seismic upgrading, 
accessibility to the disabled and improved electrical wiring. 
The California Library Construction and Renovation Bond 
Act grant funds will allow the Library to double the size of the 
Chinatown Branch Library and significantly improve both 
public spaces and the staff work space, thereby enabling 
additional services to be provided. The total project cost 
would be $4,067,065 ($2,454,573 in proposed grant funds and 
$1,582,492 in local bond funds). 

The Public Library advises that the City must enter into the 
proposed grant contract with the State in order to receive the 
$2,484,573 in Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act 
grant funds. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

27 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Project Budget 







1988 








Library 






Grant ] 


improvement 






Funds 


Bond Funds 


Total 


Design Phase 








Programming 


$ 


$60,000 


$60,000 


Estimator 


6,500 


3,500 


10,000 


Bureau of Architecture 


78,000 


70,061 


148,061 


Interior Design 


8,104 


4,363 


12,467 


Structural Engineer 


26,000 


77,000 


103,000 


Mechanical Engineer 


20,150 


19,850 


40,000 


Electrical Engineer 


5,890 


13,110 


19,000 


Asbestos Investigator 


4,875 


2,625 


7,500 


Surveys 


2.405 


1.295 


3.700 


Subtotal 


$151,924 


$251,804 


$403,728 


Construction Phase 








Construction 


$1305,234 


$996,822 $2,802,056 


Construction Management 


117,000 


99,000 


216,000 


Permit Fees 


5,285 


2,846 


8,131 


Soil Tests 


20,865 


11,235 


32,100 


Art Enrichment 


9,017 


18,729 


27,746 


Asbestos Abatement 


148,850 


80,150 


229,000 


State Administrator Fee 


12,361 


6,656 


19,017 


Contingency 


214.037 


115.250 


329.287 



Subtotal 



Total 



$2,332,649 $1,330,688 $3,663,337 
$2,484,573 $1,582,492 $4,067,065 



Comments: 1. The Public Library advises that it intends to also solicit 

private donations totalling $191,525 in order to purchase data 
processing equipment for the Chinatown Branch Library. 

2. The Public Library reports that it is projected that 
construction on the Chinatown Branch Library would 
commence February of 1993. The Library anticipates issuing 
an Invitation for Bids on November 15, 1992 to acquire the 
necessary construction contractor. 

3. Indirect costs are not included in this project budget 
because, according to the Public Library, the State does not 
allow indirect costs to be included in this grant. 



BOARD OF SI JPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



4. At the time the Board of Supervisors authorized the Public 
Library to apply for, accept and expend the California Library 
Construction and Renovation Bond Act grant, the grant 
funds earmarked for the construction contract were not 
placed on reserve pending the Library's submission of 
information regarding MBE/WBE contract participation. 
However, the 1988 Library Improvement Bonds funds 
earmarked for this project have been placed on reserve. 
Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends that the Public 
Library report to the Finance Committee on the contract 
details, including the MBE/WBE status of the contracts, 
when the Library submits the request for the release of the 
bond funds regarding the restoration of the Chinatown 
Branch Library. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

29 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1992 

Item 2 - File 100-92-5 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of July 
22, 1992. 

This is a hearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the revenues 
of the City and County of San Francisco. 

As of the writing of this report, several different proposals by the Governor 
and various portions of the California Legislature exist and no final steps have 
been taken toward final adoption of the 1992-93 State budget. Until such final 
adoption, we are unable to assess the exact impact on the revenues and 
expenditures of the City and County of San Francisco. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISOR ^ 

BUDGET ANALYST 

30 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Item 3 - File 25-92-22 



Note: 

Department 

Item: 



Services to 
be Performed: 



Description - 



Comments: 



This item was continued from the July 15, 1992 Finance 
Committee Meeting. 

Police Department 

Resolution concurring with the Controller's Certification of 
Costs required by Charter Section 8.300-1 (Proposition J) that 
certain services can continue to be practically performed by a 
private contractor for a lower cost than similar services 
performed by the City and County of San Francisco. 



Janitorial Services for all nine District Police stations, the 
Police Academy, the Pistol Range, the Juvenile Division, and 
the Golden Gate stables. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for these 
janitorial services in fiscal year 1992-93 would result in 
estimated savings as follows: 

DPW Operated Costs $740,230 

Contracted Service Cost 277.797 

Estimated Savings for Contracted 
Service Cost 462,433 

1. The above estimates are based on Controller revisions to 
the original Controller certified cost estimates which were 
previously reported to the Finance Committee. The DPW 
Operated Cost estimate reflects amounts submitted by the 
Department of Public Works (DPW) to the Controller and 
certified by the Controller rather than numbers derived by the 
Controller, as was previously done. The Contracted Service 
Cost estimate is based on the actual lowest price bid received 
from the three janitorial contract bidders on July 27, 1992 
instead of an initial estimated contractual cost based on a 
walkthrough of Police facilities from two janitorial 
contractors in January, 1992. 

2. DPW currently provides janitorial services to the Police 
Department. FY 1992-93 would be the first year that the Police 
Department would fully contract for these janitorial services. 

3. According to Officer Tom Strong, of the Police 
Department's Accounting Office, the Police Departmenl paid 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

31 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



$33,796 to the Department of Public Works to provide 
janitorial services during the period of July 1, 1992 to July 31, 
1992. This money was paid with money from the Police 
Department's FY 1992-93 Building and Repair budget. This 
was done to prevent a lapse in service as the Police 
Department was still in the process of selecting a private 
contractor. Mr. Strong advises that a total of $280,000 has 
been budgeted for contracted janitorial services in the FY 
1992-93 budget. The $33,796 used to provide janitorial services 
in July will be deducted from the $280,000 and returned to the 
Building and Repair account. The remaining $246,204 will be 
used to pay any additional costs to the Department of Public 
Works pending the selection of a contractor, and then for the 
contracted janitorial services. 

4. Mr. Steve Lutz, Senior Analyst of the Police Department's 
Planning Division, reports that the scope of janitorial 
services provided to the Police Department would eliminate 
the Hibernia Bank Building facility and add the Pistol Range. 
In addition, Mr. Lutz stated that the Police Department has 
not been satisfied with the level of service currently provided 
by DPW. As a result, Mr. Arnie Sowell of the Controller's 
Office reports that the 1992-93 proposed in-house versus 
contracted services represent a higher level of janitorial 
services than what has been historically provided. Mr. 
Raymond Zahndt of the Department of Public Works 
estimates that to provide the level of service the Police 
Department is now requesting, the Department of Public 
Works would have to expand their current staff level from 6 
FTE to 13 FTE. This increased level of service is reflected 
above in the DPW Operated Cost estimate and Contracted 
Service Cost estimate provided by the Controller's Office. 

5. The Finance Committee requested that the Controller 
estimate the costs of the Police Department providing these 
services directly by employing janitors. The Controller has 
determined that Police Department In-house Janitorial 
Services as compared with DPW Janitorial Services and 
contractual janitorial services are as follows: 

DPW Operated Costs $740,230 

Police Department In-House 
Janitorial Services 625.934 

Estimated Savings for Police vs DPW 
Janitorial Services $114,296 



Police Department In-House 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

32 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Janitorial Services $625,934 

Contracted Sendee Cost 277.797 

Estimated Savings for Contracted 
Service Cost vs. Police In-House $348,137 

Therefore, as noted above, it would be approximately $114,296 
less expensive for the Police Department to directly provide its 
own janitorial services in 1992-93 rather than through DPW, 
primarily due to the reduction of DPW overhead expenses. 
However, as also noted above, it would be approximately 
$348,137 less expensive for the Police Department to contract 
out for janitorial services than to hire in-house janitors in the 
Police Department. As previously discussed, changing from 
the current DPW janitorial services to contractual janitorial 
services would result in an estimated 1992-93 annualized 
savings of approximately $462,433. 

6. The Police Department reports that two of the three 
contractors , including the lowest contract bidder are MBEs 
or WBEs. 

7. Mr. Carl Bunch of the Mayor's Office, Employee Relations 
Division, advises that the City of San Francisco does not have 
a duty to meet and confer with the Union regarding the 
contracting out of services before a decision is made unless 
layoffs will occur as a result of the decision. However, 
following a decision to contract out, the City does have an 
obligation to meet and confer with the Union regarding the 
impact of the decision on bargaining unit employees. The 
Service Employees International Union's (SEIU), 
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) also states that upon 
request by the Union and prior to the City making any final 
decision, the City will hold informational meetings with the 
Union to discuss and attempt to resolve issues relating to the 
contracting out of services. 

8. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses, including MBE/WBE status is 
attached. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

33 



07/22/92 13:54 ©415 554 7568 SPECIAL PROJECTS *-.-. HARVEY H RUbt Jffl- 



Charter 8.300-1 (Proposition J) Questionnaire 

Department San Francisco Police Department 
Contract Services Janitorial Service 
Time Period 



1) Who performed services prior to contracting out? 

Department of Public Works Janitorial. 

2) Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting 
out? 

None, these employees should easily be absorbed into 
DPW operations . 

3) Explain disposition of employees if they were laid off. 

Trained janitorial employee would be able to find 
employment in federal, state and private sectors. 

4) What percent of City employee's time is spent on services to be 
contracted out? 

100% 

5) How long have services been contracted out? 

These services have been performed by the Department 
of Public Works; they have never been contracted out. 

6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J 
Certification? 

It is anticipated to commence by 1992-1993. 

7) How will contract services meet the goals of your MBE/WBE 
Action Plan? 

The competitive bid process will insure compliance. 
Present contractor at the Hibernia Bank Police 
Building is MBE/LBE. 

<^*Z.__ 

>resentative MICHAEL J. SULLIVAN 

SERGEANT OF POLICE 

(Type Name, Title) 
557-6720 




Telephone 
cxlquespj 



34 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Items 4. 5. 6. 7. and 8 -Files. 97-92-42. 97-92-43. 97-92-43.1. 97-92-44. and 97-92-44.1 

Items: Ordinance amending Section 10.117-73 of the 

Aclministrative Code to require that the Emergency Medical 
Services Fund be continued using certain penalty revenues 
pursuant to Government Code Sections 76000 and 76104, to 
require that the moneys in such fund be payable only for 
the purposes specified n Government Code Section 76104, 
and to make changes pursuant to recent amendments to 
Health and Safety Code Sections 1797.98a through 
1797.98g (File 97-92-42). 

Ordinance amending Section 10.117-108 of the 
Administrative Code to establish the Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund, to require that the moneys 
in such fund be payable only for the purposes set forth in 
Government Code Section 76102, and to renumber Charter 
Section 6.311 to 6.306 (File 97-92-43). 

Resolution providing for the disbursement of certain 
additional penalties assessed in criminal cases pursuant to 
Government Code 76000, establishing a Courthouse 
Construction Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 
76100, establishing an Automated Fingerprint 
Identification Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 
76102, continuing an Emergency Medical Services Fund 
pursuant to Government Code Section 76104, and imposing 
an additional penalty on all parking offenses to support the 
Courthouse Construction Fund pursuant to Government 
Code Section 76000 (File 97-92-43.1). 

Ordinance amending Section 10.117-35 of the 
Administrative Code to rename the "Courthouse Temporary 
Construction Fund" the "Courthouse Construction Fund," to 
require that surcharges on filing fees in the Municipal and 
Superior Courts and penalty assessments provided in 
Government Code Section 76000 be deposited in such fund, 
and to require that the moneys deposited in such fund be 
used only for the purposes set forth in Government Code 
Sections 76000, 76100, and 76238 (File 97-92-44). 

Resolution renaming the Courthouse Construction Fund 
and continuing the surcharge on filing fees in civil and 
probate actions in the Superior Court and in civil actions in 
the Municipal Court as provided in Government Code 
Section 76238 and Section 10.117-35 of the San Francisco 
Administrative Code, to assist in the acquisition, 
rehabilitation, construction, and financing of courtrooms or 
of a courtroom building or buildings containing facilities 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

35 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

necessary or incidental to the operation of the judicial 
system in the City and County of San Francisco (File 97-92- 
44.1). 

Description: In August, 1991 the State Legislature adopted the Trial 

Court Realignment and Efficiency Act ("the Act") which 
made a number of revisions to California law regarding the 
operation of California trial courts. The Act provides that 
certain fines and penalties levied by Municipal and 
Superior Courts must be deposited into one or more special 
funds, as specified in the California Government Code. 



County Penalty Assessment in Criminal Matters 

The Act requires that Counties impose a "County penalty 
assessment" of $7.00 for every $10.00 fine, penalty, or 
forfeiture imposed in criminal matters, including violations 
of the Vehicle Code, but excluding parking offenses. 

The Board of Supervisors must, by resolution, establish one 
or more of the five special funds authorized by the 
Legislature, and must also specify the amount of County 
penalty assessment revenues to be allocated to each fund. 
The $7.00 County penalty assessment has been imposed in 
San Francisco since September 11, 1991 (See Comment No. 
3). 

The proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1) would establish 
three special funds and direct the Municipal and Superior 
Courts to continue to assess the $7.00 additional penalty for 
each $10 penalty imposed in criminal matters. For each 
$7.00 collected, the proposed resolution would direct the 
County Treasurer to deposit $1.00 to the Courthouse 
Construction Fund, $2.00 to the Emergency Medical 
Services Fund, and $4.00 to the Automated Fingerprint 
Identification Fund. 

The two special funds which could be established under the 
Act but which would not be established under the proposed 
resolution are a Criminal Justice Facilities Construction 
Fund and a Forensics Laboratory Fund. 

Pursuant to the proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1), two 
proposed ordinances would amend provisions of the 
Administrative Code concerning the existing Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund (File 97-92-43) and the 
existing Emergency Medical Services Fund (File 97-92-42) 
to make them consistent with current California law. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

36 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Parking Fine Increase ($2.50) 

The Act also authorizes the Board of Supervisors to impose 
an additional $2.50 penalty for every parking offense where 
a fine is imposed, and to deposit the additional revenue in a 
Courthouse Construction Fund, provided that the Board of 
Supervisors adopts a resolution stating that the imposition 
of this additional penalty is necessary to the County for 
courthouse construction. Of each $2.50 additional penalty 
for parking offenses, the County is required to transfer 
$1.00 to the State Controller. 

The proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1) would therefore 
also state the necessary findings regarding courthouse 
construction, impose the additional $2.50 penalty for 
parking offenses, and direct the Treasurer to deposit the 
additional $2.50 penalty to the Courthouse Construction 
Fund and to remit $1.00 of each $2.50 collected to the State 
Controller. 

The Act also authorizes the Counties to impose another 
$2.50 surcharge on parking fines for deposit to a Criminal 
Justice Facilities Construction Fund. However, this 
additional $2.50 surcharge is not included in the proposed 
legislation (see Comment No. 8). 



Filing Fee Surcharges in Municipal and Superior 
Courts 

In addition, Section 76238 of the Act provides that the City 
and County of San Francisco may impose a surcharge of not 
more than $50 on filing fees in civil and probate matters in 
the Superior Court, and not more than $50 in civil 
proceedings in the Municipal Court, for the San Francisco 
Courthouse Construction Fund. The amount of the 
surcharge must be established by the Board of Supervisors. 

Section 76238 replaced former Government Code Section 
76381.5, under which San Francisco had already 
established the Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund. 
A surcharge of $50 is currently added to filing fees in 
Superior Court and a surcharge of $10 is currently added to 
filing fees in Municipal Court. 

The proposed resolution (File 97-92-44.1) would therefore 
rename the "Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund" as 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

37 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

the "Courthouse Construction Fund" and would direct the 
Municipal and Superior Courts to continue to collect the 
$10 and $50 surcharges on filing fees, respectively, for 
deposit to the Courthouse Construction Fund. 

Pursuant to both proposed resolutions (Files 97-92-43.1 and 
97-92-44.1) affecting the Courthouse Construction Fund, a 
proposed ordinance (File 97-92-44) would amend the 
Administrative Code to rename the "Courthouse Temporary 
Construction Fund" as the "Courthouse Construction 
Fund," and to require that revenues derived from the $7.00 
County penalty assessment in criminal cases (of which 
$1.00 is proposed for the Courthouse Construction Fund), 
the $2.50 additional penalty in parking cases (of which 
$1.50 would go to the Courthouse Construction Fund), and 
the Municipal and Superior Court filing fee surcharges ($10 
and $50, respectively) be deposited to the newly named 
Courthouse Construction Fund. 

Comments: 1. As noted above, the fees affected by the proposed 

resolutions and ordinances are a $7.00 additional penalty 
for criminal offenses, a $2.50 additional penalty for parking 
offenses, a $10 surcharge on filing fees for civil proceedings 
in Municipal Court, and a $50 surcharge on filing fees for 
civil and probate proceedings in Superior Court. Of these 
fees, the only new fee would be the $2.50 additional penalty 
for parking offenses, which was approved by the Municipal 
Court in June, 1992. However, the $7.00 County penalty 
assessment which took effect in September, 1991 is a new 
source of revenue to the Courthouse Construction Fund and 
the Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund. 

Each of the three special funds which would receive the 
designated revenues have already been established in some 
form. The table on the following page illustrates the 
current sources of revenue for these funds and the proposed 
allocations, as described above. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Current and Proposed Revenue Allocations Under the 
Trial Court Realignment and Efficiency Act 



Fund 

Courthouse (Temporary) 
Construction Fund 



Current Source 
of Revenues 



Proposed Source 
of Revenues 



$10 Municipal Ct. fee $10 Municipal Ct. fee 
$50 Superior Ct. fee $50 Superior Ct. fee 

$2.50 parking fine 

surcharge, less $1.00 

to State Controller 



Emergency Medical Services Fund 



$2.00 of the 

$7.00 additional 

penalty in 

criminal cases* 



$1.00 of the 

$7.00 additional 

penalty in 

criminal cases 

$2.00 of the 

$7.00 additional 

penalty in 

criminal cases 



Traffic Fines 



Traffic Fines 



Automated Fingerprint I.D. Fund 



None 



$4.00 of the 

$7.00 additional 

penalty in 

criminal cases 



* See Comment No. 3 regarding the current allocation of the $5 remainder of the 
$7.00 County penalty assessment in criminal cases. 



2. According to Mr. Gordon Park-Li of the Municipal Court, 
the $2.50 surcharge was included in the bail increases for 
parking offenses which were approved by the Municipal 
Court in June, 1992. 

3. Mr. Park-Li indicates that prior to enactment of the Trial 
Court Realignment and Efficiency Act in August 1991, an 
additional penalty of $9.00 was assessed for each $10 fine in 
criminal cases. Of this $9.00, $7.00 was remitted to the 
State Controller, and $2.00 was allocated to the County's 
Emergency Medical Services Fund. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

39 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Following enactment of the Act in August 1991, the 
mandated County penalty assessment of $7.00 was imposed 
instead of the $9.00 additional penalty in criminal matters. 
However, Mr. Park-Li indicates that, except for the 
Emergency Medical Services Fund, San Francisco County 
has not yet established any of the special funds required 
under the Act, nor has the Board of Supervisors adopted a 
resolution (see File 97-92-43.1) indicating how the $7.00 
County penalty assessment is to be allocated. Mr. Park-Li 
reports that State guidelines for implementing the Act were 
not issued until October, 1991, and that implementation in 
San Francisco was also delayed by the Mayoral election. 

According to the Controller's Office and the Municipal 
Court, approximately $232,000, representing $2.00 of each 
$7.00 County penalty assessment imposed between 
September 11, 1991 and May 31, 1992, has been 
appropriated to the Emergency Medical Services Fund. The 
remainder of the revenues collected to date (totalling 
$701,914 on May 31, 1992) is held in the State Authorized 
Special Revenue Fund, awaiting approval of the allocation 
formula by the Board of Supervisors. 

4. The Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund was 
established in San Francisco in March, 1991, when the 
Board of Supervisors authorized an additional penalty of 
$.50 for each $10 penalty in criminal matters. Mr. Park-Li 
states that the $.50 additional penalty was never imposed 
because of delays in establishing the Fund and assessing 
the penalty, and the subsequent enactment of the Trial 
Court Realignment and Efficiency Act in August, 1991. 
Therefore, no revenues have been allocated to the 
Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund, according to 
Mr. Park-Li. Under the proposed resolution (File 97-92- 
43.1), revenues to this Fund would come from $4.00 of the 
$7.00 additional penalty (for each $10 collected) in criminal 



An Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund is required 
to be used to obtain and operate automated fingerprint 
identification equipment, to replace existing equipment, 
and/or to reimburse the City and County for previous 
expenditures for such equipment. 

Mr. Tom Strong of the Police Department (SFPD) states 
that the SFPD employs 29 technicians to operate its 
automated fingerprint equipment. Mr. Strong indicates 
that these personnel costs are budgeted in the Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund for 1992-93, at a total 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

40 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



estimated cost of $1,430,555, and that maintenance and 
equipment costs are also included in the 1992-93 budget for 
the Fund, in the amount of $315,262. 

The SFPD's 1992-93 budgeted expenditures from the 
Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund therefore total 
approximately $1,746,000. The proposed budget for 1992-93 
includes $700,000 in estimated trial court revenues to this 
Fund, as well as a revenue transfer from the General Fund 
of approximately $1,046,000. Therefore, General Fund 
contributions could be reduced by increasing County 
penalty assessment allocations to the Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund. Allocation of such County 
penalty assessment revenues is a policy matter for the 
Board of Supervisors. 

Mr. Strong indicates that in 1991-92, the costs of the 
automated fingerprint identification system were paid from 
the Narcotics Forfeiture Fund, which provides a source of 
revenue for SFPD special projects. The Mayor's proposed 
budget for 1992-93 includes approximately $1.47 million in 
the Narcotics Forfeiture Fund. 

The Administrative Code provides that expenditures from 
the Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund are subject 
to appropriation by the Board of Supervisors. 

5. As noted above, the Emergency Medical Services Fund 
currently receives $2.00 from the $7.00 County penalty 
assessment which took effect in September 1991. Under 
the proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1) this Fund would 
continue to receive $2.00 of the $7.00 County penalty 
assessment. 

The Trial Court Realignment and Efficiency Act requires 
that the amounts allocated to this Fund equal but not 
exceed the amount deposited in fiscal year 1990-91 (except 
for a percentage increase equal to the increase in criminal 
fines and penalties over fiscal year 1990-91, but not more 
than 10 percent). 

However, the 1992-93 budgeted amount for the Fund of 
$437,705 is $44,777 less than the 1990-91 allocation of 
$482,482, as reported by the Department of Public Health 
(DPH). The budgeted amount includes $200,000 in County 
penalty assessment revenues as well as $237,705 from 
Traffic Fines. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

4] 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



The Budget Analyst estimates that the level of County 
penalty assessment revenues which can be expected for this 
Fund, based on actual 1991-92 revenues reported by the 
Controller, is higher than the budgeted amount by 
$126,177. Therefore, allocations to the Fund in 1992-93 
should actually exceed the 1990-91 level by approximately 
$81,400 ($126,177 less $44,777). 

Mr. John Madden of the Controller's Office states that 
adjustments will be made in allocations to the designated 
Funds, including the Emergency Medical Services Fund, at 
the end of fiscal year 1992-93, to conform actual 
appropriations to the requirements of the Act. 

The Emergency Medical Services Fund is used to reimburse 
physicians, hospitals, and other providers of emergency 
medical care for the cost of emergency medical care. Up to 
10 percent of this Fund may be used to reimburse 
administrative expenses; 58 percent of the remaining 
balance in the Fund must be disbursed to compensate 
private physicians for the cost of unreimbursed emergency 
care; 25 percent of the balance of the Fund must be 
disbursed to hospitals which provide disproportionate 
trauma and emergency services; and 17 percent of the 
balance of the Fund must be disbursed for other emergency 
medical services as determined by the Director of Public 
Health. 

The Director of Public Health is responsible for receiving 
and approving claims for reimbursement. However, any 
payments to a single provider in excess of $5,000 must be 
appropriated by the Board of Supervisors. Dr. Pointer 
states that the amount authorized for reimbursement of 
administrative expenses is appropriated to Medicus, which 
administers the funds under contract with DPH. 

6. The Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund currently 
receives revenues from a $10 surcharge on filing fees in 
Municipal Court and a $50 surcharge on filing fees in 
Superior Court. The proposed ordinances and resolutions 
would rename the fund as the Courthouse Construction 
Fund and would create additional revenues through the 
$2.50 surcharge on parking fines imposed by the Municipal 
Court and $1.00 of the $7.00 additional penalty in criminal 



As previously noted, the Municipal Court is authorized to 
impose a surcharge of up to $50 on filing fees in civil 
proceedings for the Courthouse Construction Fund. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

42 






Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



However, under the proposed resolution (File 97-92-44.1) the 
surcharge in Municipal Court would continue to be only $10. 

Although the proposed 1992-93 budget includes only 
$204,200 for the Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund 
from Municipal and Superior Court filing fee surcharges, Ms. 
Kate Harrison of the Superior Court estimates that these fees 
will generate approximately $2.28 million, including interest 
earnings, in 1992-93. 

Under California law, a Courthouse Construction Fund is 
required to be used for the acquisition, rehabilitation, 
construction, and financing of courtrooms, courtroom 
buildings, or buildings containing facilities necessary or 
incidental to the operation of the justice system. The 
Administrative Code provides that expenditures from the 
Fund are to be determined by a committee comprised of 
Court officers, with expenditures subject to appropriation by 
the Board of Supervisors. 

7. Based on revenue estimates provided by the Controller's 
Office and the Courts, the amounts collected in 1991-92 for 
each of these funds and the amounts expected to be collected 
under the proposed resolutions and ordinances are as follows: 

Revenues Collected 

Actual Estimated 
Fund 1991-92 1992-93 

Courthouse (Temporary) 
Construction Fund 

$50 Superior Ct. surcharge $1,603,620 $1,603,620 

$10 Municipal Ct., surcharge 278,845 278,845 

Annual Interest on filing fee surcharges 400,683 400,683 

$2.50 parking fine surcharge 2,250,000 

$1.00 of $7.00 additional penalty* 132.281 163.088 

Subtotal $2,415,429 $4,696,236 

Emergency Medical Services Fund 

$2.00 of $7.00 additional penalty* 264,561 326,177 

Automated Fingerprint I.D. Fund 

$4.00 of $7.00 additional penalty* 529.122 652.353 

Total Estimated Revenues $3,209,112 $5,674,766 

* Allocation of the County penalty assessment revenues is dependent 
upon the allocation formula adopted by the Board of Supervisors. 
However, appropriations were made in 1991-92 to the Emergency Medical 
Services Fund (see Comment No. 3). 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

43 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



The General Fund would not receive any portion of these 
revenues. 

Ms. Harrison states that the balance in the Courthouse 
Temporary Construction Fund was approximately $6.73 
million on June 1, 1992. She indicates that the Fund is 
expected to be used to finance construction of a new County 
Courthouse. 

8. The Budget Analyst notes that the Act also authorizes 
the Board of Supervisors to establish a Criminal Justice 
Facilities Construction Fund, with expenditures authorized 
for jail facilities and juvenile halls, as well as courtrooms. 
However, a Criminal Justice Facilities Construction Fund 
has not been included in the proposed legislation, even 
though it could be used to construct a wider variety of 
facilities than the Courthouse Construction Fund. 

The reason for this is that a Courthouse Construction Fund 
must be established to obtain approximately $2.3 million 
which is available through surcharges on filing fees in 
Municipal and Superior Courts, which must be used 
exclusively for courthouse construction. According to the 
City Attorney, if the Courthouse Construction Fund is 
established under the Act, a $2.50 surcharge on parking 
fines must also be collected for the Fund. If a Criminal 
Justice Facilities Construction Fund were also established, 
a further parking surcharge of $2.50 would be required, for 
a total surcharge of $5.00, of which $2.00 would be remitted 
to the State Controller. 

Mr. Park-Li states that representatives of the Courts and 
the Mayor's Office have agreed that to impose both parking 
surcharges would result in unreasonable increases in 
parking fines, and could limit the City's ability to raise 
parking fines in the future, which would benefit the 
General Fund. Therefore, a Criminal Justices Facilities 
Construction Fund was not proposed. If it were established 
instead of the Courthouse Construction Fund, filing fee 
surcharges for courthouse construction of approximately 
$2.3 million would be foregone. If it were established in 
addition to the Courthouse Construction Fund, parking 
surcharges would increase by $5.00, rather than $2.50, of 
which $2.00, or 40 percent, would be transferred to the 
State Controller. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

44 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Recommendations: 1. The proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1) contains the 
following provisions which are policy matters for the Board 
of Supervisors: 

(a) Establishing the Emergency Medical Services Fund, the 
Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund, and the 
Courthouse Construction Fund pursuant to Government 
Code Section 76000, for receipt of County penalty 
assessments of $7.00 for each $10 collected in criminal 
cases; and, by omission, not establishing a Criminal Justice 
Facilities Construction Fund nor a Forensic Laboratory 
Fund for receipt of such County penalty assessment 
revenues. 

(b) Specifying that each $7.00 County penalty assessment 
will be allocated as follows: $1.00 to the Courthouse 
Construction Fund, $2.00 to the Emergency Medical 
Services Fund, and $4.00 to the Automated Fingerprint 
Identification Fund. 

(c) Imposing an additional penalty of $2.50 for each parking 
offense where a penalty is imposed, for allocation to the 
Courthouse Construction Fund, as required if the Fund is 
established. 

2. Since the proposed ordinances concerning the existing 
Emergency Medical Services Fund (File 97-92-42) and the 
Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund (File 97-92-43) 
would conform the San Francisco Administrative Code to 
the current requirements of California law, the Budget 
Analyst recommends approval of these proposed 
ordinances. 

3. Since California law authorizes but does not require the 
San Francisco Board of Supervisors to impose surcharges 
on filing fees in the Municipal and Superior Courts for the 
Courthouse Construction Fund, and to fix the amount of the 
surcharges, approval of the proposed resolution (File 97-92- 
44.1), which would continue the existing surcharges, is a 
policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 

4. Since the proposed ordinance concerning the Courthouse 
Construction Fund (File 97-92-44) would conform the San 
Francisco Administrative Code to the current requirements 
of California law, the Budget Analyst recommends approval 
of the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

45 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Item 9 -File 27-92-5 

Department 

Item: 



Airports Commission 

Ordinance approving Modification No. 1 of a lease agreement 
between City College of San Francisco (CCSF) and the City 
and County of San Francisco, acting by and through its 
Airports Commission. 

Description: Under Lease and Use Agreement No. 77-0202, signed on July 

19, 1977, the San Francisco Community College District 
leases Plot 20 on the Northeast corner of the San Francisco 
International Airport from the City and County of San 
Francisco for their School of Aviation. The proposed 
ordinance would approve Modification No. 1 of the Lease and 
Use Agreement to delete 3,500 square feet of space from Plot 

20. This space would be used by the Airport and the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA) for the enhancement of air 
traffic control. The FAA would install a Localized 
Directional Approach (LDA) aircraft navigational aid on the 
3,500 square feet to increase landing capacity during bad 
weather. In addition, the City would be required to supply an 
electrical power line to the site at a cost not to exceed $30,000. 

Comments: 1. San Francisco Community College's Lease and Use 

Agreement Modification No. 1 was approved by Airports 
Commission Resolution No. 92-0189 on June 16, 1992. 

2. As adopted in Resolution 92-0189, United Air Lines would 
supply funding for establishing the electrical power line to 
the site, with the understanding that the Airport would 
reimburse United Air Lines by a rental credit equal to the 
actual receipted cost but not to exceed $30,000 for the 
establishment of the electrical power line. 

3. The proposed ordinance would decrease San Francisco 
City College's exclusive space from 149,470 square feet to 
145,970 square feet, a reduction of 3,500 square feet as a result 
of the proposed Modification No. 1. Ms. Angela Gittens of the 
Airports Commission indicates that the Community College 
District is in agreement with this reduction. 

4. Ms. Angela Gittens of the Airports Commission advises 
that the City would not forego any revenue because the 
Community College District of San Francisco pays only $1 per 
year for the lease of Plot 20. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



HOARD OF SUPERVISO RS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

46 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Item 10 -File 47-92-5 

1. The proposed ordinance would approve and adopt legal documents and 
authorization for a management agreement pertaining to the Polk-Bush Parking 
Garage. 

2. The Polk-Bush Garage is a new City-owned parking facility located at the 
southeast corner of Bush and Polk Streets. The Parking Authority reports that 
the garage is scheduled to be completed by mid-November of 1992. The new 
garage will include an annex which would be located on Bush Street. The 
proposed annex is currently a metered parking facility which the City leases from 
the San Francisco Unified School District. The Polk-Bush Garage has 132 
parking spaces and is projected to serve approximately 12,500 vehicles per month. 
The annex will be converted from the existing 38-space metered parking facility to 
a 30-space monthly parking facility. 

Mr. Kevin Hagerty, Director of the Parking Authority reports that the 
Department will submit a request to the Board of Supervisors, prior to October of 
1992, to amend the Traffic Code to delete the annex portion of the parking facility 
from the category of a metered facility. 

3. Under the proposed legal documents, the parking rates to be charged per 
vehicle parked in the new Polk-Bush Garage and annex are as follows: 

Hourly Parking-Daytime Rates (Polk-Bush Garage Only) 

Time Parking Charge 

0-1 hour $1.00 

1-2 hours 2.00 

2-3 hours 3.00 

3-4 hours 4.00 

4-5 hours 5.00 

5-6 hours 6.00 

6-7 hours 7.00 

Over 7 hours 8.00 

Hourly Parking-Nighttime Rates (Polk-Bush Garage Only) 

6:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. - $1.00 per hour 
Maximum Rate - $3.00 

Monthly Parking (Annex Only) 

).00 per month (payable on a month-to-month basis only) 



HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

47 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Lost Ticket Charge (Polk-Bush Garage Only) 

The rate for over 7 hours of parking will be charged for each day, or part 
thereof, unless the garage manager can verify that a greater charge is 
appropriate by identifying the lost ticket from the records. 

4. Under the proposed management agreement (after deduction of parking 
tax and payment of rent on annex property), the garage operator would receive a 
monthly management fee (based on the monthly cost to operate the garage) paid 
from the gross parking revenues and would receive five percent of the garage 
gross revenues exceeding $300,000 per year. The balance of revenues would 
accrue to the City's Off-Street Parking Fund. The management agreement 
provides that the monthly management fee would be adjusted annually according 
to the Consumer Price Index. 

Comments 

1. Mr. Hagerty reports that the Parking Authority estimates that the Polk- 
Bush Garage and annex will initially generate gross annual revenues of 
approximately $250,000 and $25,000 respectively, for a total projected gross 
revenue amount of $275,00 annually. The Parking Authority estimates that 
$55,000 of the $275,000 would be deducted for parking tax, based on a 20 percent 
parking tax, leaving a balance of $220,000. Of the $220,000, the Parking Authority 
estimates that $12,000 would be paid to the Unified School District for rental of the 
annex property, $180,000 to $204,000 would be paid to the garage operator, and a 
balance of $4,000 to $28,000 would accrue to the City's Off-Street Parking Fund. 

2. Mr. Hagerty advises that the metered parking facility which is to be 
converted into the annex is estimated to generate $12,235 in revenues for 1991-92. 
According to Mr. Hagerty, the merchants in the immediate vicinity of the 
proposed annex, strongly support the conversion of the existing metered parking 
facility into a monthly parking facility because loitering, vandalism and other 
negative street activities are currently taking place at the existing facility. 

3. The proposed legislation only approves the legal documents and 
management agreement as to form and authorizes the Director of Property to seek 
competitive bids for the management of the Polk-Bush Garage and annex. The 
actual award of a management agreement will be subject to subsequent 
legislation to be adopted by the Board of Supervisors. 

4. The Budget Analyst recommends that the proposed legislation be 
continued to the Finance Committee meeting on August 5, 1992, in order to obtain 
from the Department specific information on why, under the proposed 
management agreement the garage operator would receive 82 to 93 percent of 
gross revenues (after deduction of parking tax) and how these percentages 
compare with what the garage operator's percentage of gross would be under an 
alternative lease agreement. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

48 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Rpremmpnriation 



Continue the proposed legislation to the Finance Committee meeting on 
August 5, 1992. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Item 11 - File 101-92-5 



Amount: 



Source of Funds: 



Description: 



Department: Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Item: Supplemental appropriation ordinance for a capital 

improvement project (Hall of Justice Parking Lot Expansion) 
to cover overage above ten percent of the contracted amount 
pursuant to provisions of Charter Section 7.203 and providing 
for ratification of action previously taken by the Department 
of Public Works for Fiscal Year 1992-93. 

$9,916 

1990 Correctional Facilities Improvement Bond Fund 
(Proposition A) 

The DPW reports that the proposed supplemental 
appropriation in the amount of $9,916 would be used to pay for 
contract modifications, which exceed ten percent of the 
original contract, for the Hall of Justice Parking Lot 
Expansion Project. Charter Section 7.203 requires 
authorization of the Board of Supervisors if the amount of a 
contract is increased by more than ten percent of the original 
contract amount. 

Comments: 1. The Hall of Justice Parking Lot Expansion Project 

provided additional parking spaces in five (5) separate lots to 
serve the Hall of Justice. The new parking spaces replaced 
spaces removed from the existing Hall of Justice parking lot 
as a result of the construction of the new Sheriffs facility. 
Specific project work consisted of paving, striping, 
constructing islands, curbs, sidewalks, fencing, gates, wheel 
blocks, lighting, landscaping, attendant booths and detectors 
and installing traffic signs. The project was completed 
August 30, 1991. 

2. The DPW advises that during construction on the parking 
lot project, it was determined that additional work, which 
was not included in the contract, was required in order to 
conform to design specifications and code requirements and 
to expedite the project to eliminate a potential delay claim 
from the contractor for the new Sheriffs facility project. 
Examples of contract modifications, which cost an additional 
$109,702 included, (1) additional concrete and paving work 
required to meet design specifications, (2) an increase in 
parking lot capacity to satisfy code requirements and (3) the 
installation of safety loops (electronic motion detecting device 
which allows vehicles to pass safely through the parking 
facility gate) and modified sliding Kates to eliminate unsafe 
conditions. 

HOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

50 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



3. The details of this request of $9,916 for the Hall of Justice 
Parking Lot Expansion Project are as follows: 



Original Contract Amount $645,958 

Contract Modifications 109,702 

Credit for unused construction 

materials (i.e., asphalt concrete) (35.190) 

Subtotal 74.512 

Revised Contract Amount $720,470 

Previously Appropriated Funds for 

Contractual Services 710.554 

Excess of Revised Contract Amount 

Over Original Contract Amount $9,916 

4. As reflected above, the revised contract amount includes 
contract modifications which result in a net increase of 
$74,512 ($109,702 minus $35,190) or 11.5 percent greater than 
the original contract amount of $645,958. The $9,916 
represents the difference between the original amount 
appropriated and the revised contract amount. 

5. As noted above, the Hall of Justice Parking Lot Expansion 
Project was completed on August 30, 1991. Mr. Nelson Wong 
of the DPW reports that the Department is requesting the 
proposed supplemental appropriation at this time, primarily 
because the contractor only recently submitted the bill to close 
out the account for this project. As noted above, the proposed 
ordinance provides for ratification of action previously taken. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

51 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Items 12 and 13 - File 170-92-9 and 170-92-9.1 

Departments: Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) 

Department of Public Works (DPW) 
Clean Water Program (CWP) 

Items: Resolution (File 170-92-9) amending and restating Resolution 

No. 542-88, adopted July 17, 1988, Resolution No. 677-88, 
adopted August 29, 1988 and Resolution No. 605-91, adopted 
July 15, 1991, providing for the issuance of not to exceed the 
$385,000,000 aggregate principal amount of City and County 
of San Francisco Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 
1992, curing certain ambiguous provisions, adding to the 
covenants of the City, authorizing Sales Certificate (legal 
document relating to the official sale of the refunded bonds) 
and appointing escrow agents. 

Resolution (File 170-92-9.1) authorizing and directing the sale 
of not to exceed $385,000,000 principal amount of City and 
County of San Francisco Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, 
Series 1992, authorizing the publication of official notice of 
sale relating thereto; approving the form of the official 
statement; authorizing official actions; and appointing a 
fiscal agent. 

Description: During the sewer service charge rate setting process in 

April, 1992, the Board of Supervisors requested that the Chief 
Administrative Officer (CAO) investigate the possible 
refunding of some portion of the Clean Water Program's 
debt, in order to refinance the previously issued debt at 
current lower interest rates. The proposed resolutions would 
authorize the Clean Water Program to refinance up to $385 
million of existing debt. This proposed refinancing is 
anticipated to reduce the significant rate increases projected 
for the Program over the next several fiscal years. The 
proposed resolutions (Files 170-92-9 and 170-92-9.1) would 
authorize the issuance of refunding bonds in an amount not 
to exceed $385 million, and make the technical changes 
necessary to reduce future rate increases, through the 
establishment of a Rate Stabilization Fund (See Comment 
#2). 

Charter Section 7.300(5) provides that revenue bonds which 
are issued as refunding bonds do not have to be approved by 
the voters, but rather authorized by the Board of Supervisors, 
provided that the sale of the refunding bonds results in a 
lower total schedule of principal and interest payments by the 
City. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

52 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



A total of $313.5 million in previously issued debt would be 
refunded under the proposed resolutions (Files 170-92-9 and 
172-92-9.1). The bonds which would be refunded are as 
follows: 

1978 Series A $ 23.2 million 

1981 Series B 9.7 million 

1984 Series C 1.8 million 

Refunding Series 1986 136.0 million 

Series 1988 A and B 142.8 million 

Total $313.5 million 

The estimated interest on this outstanding principal is 
approximately $274 million. The current total outstanding 
debt service for principal and interest payments is 
approximately $587.5 million. The CAO estimates that the 
proposed refinancing would result in a total outstanding debt 
for principal and interest of approximately $567 million over 
the term of the bonds, which is $20.5 million less than the 
existing outstanding principal and interest. The CAO 
estimates that after adjusting for restructuring of debt 
service payments, the present value savings of the proposed 
refunding would be at least $3 million in current dollars. 
Therefore, the proposed refinancing of this debt service would 
result in a lower total scheduled principal and interest as 
required by Charter Section 7.300(5). The existing average 
interest rate on the existing debt is approximately 7.6 percent. 
The anticipated reduced interest rate on the proposed 
refunded bonds is 6 percent, or on average 1.6 percent less 
than the existing interest rate. 

As noted above, the proposed resolutions (Files 170-92-9 and 
170-92-9.1) would provide for the refinancing of an amount 
not to exceed $385 million in bond funds. According to Ms. 
Laura Wagner-Lockwood of the CAO's Office, the refunded 
bonds issued would not be used to retire the existing $313.5 
million in principal all at once, but rather this existing debt 
would be retired with the refunded bonds over a 5 year period. 
Ms. Wagner-Lockwood indicates that the monies from the 
bonds issued would be placed into an interest earning escrow 
account and be used to make payments under the existing 
debt service schedule. Ms. Wagner-Lockwood adds that the 
Department is requesting the authorization to issue 
refunding bonds in an amount not to exceed $385 million 
because of potentially lower interest earnings on the 
principal which is placed into the escrow account, in which 
case, additional bond funds would be needed in order to still 
meet escrow requirements, and also to establish a debt 
service reserve fund, if necessary, for payments on the bonds 
issued, which is required for all revenue bonds. As noted 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

53 






Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

above, however, the proposed refunding plan is anticipated to 
result in an overall present value savings in current dollars 
of at least $3 million. 

Comments: 1. The proposed resolution (File 170-92-9) would also provide 

for the establishment of a "Working Capital Fund." The City 
Attorney's Office is currently drafting the final language to 
establish this fund. The CAO reports that the "Working 
Capital Fund" would be used to account for the timing lags 
between the time when expenditures are made from the 
Clean Water Enterprise Fund and when revenue from 
monthly sewer bills is received from its customers. The CAO 
reports that the Working Capital Fund would help the Clean 
Water Program maintain a positive cash flow when water 
conservation rates are higher than anticipated, and revenues 
are below the budgeted amounts. As noted on Attachment 1, 
the CAO proposes to request that $7 million be appropriated 
into the Working Capital Fund during FY 1992-93, to be 
provided through the budgetary savings which are 
anticipated to be achieved through the proposed refinancing 
plan. The revenues which would be appropriated to this 
Fund would be subject to annual budgetary appropriations by 
the Board of Supervisors. 

2. The proposed resolution (File 170-92-9) would also provide 
for the establishment of a "Rate Stabilization Fund." The City 
Attorney's Office is also currently drafting the final language 
to establish the Rate Stabilization Fund. The CAO reports 
that the Rate Stabilization Fund would be used to keep 
anticipated rate increases in FY 1993-94, FY 1994-95 and FY 
1995-96 to 10 percent per year. The budgetary savings which 
would be achieved through the proposed refinancing plan 
would be placed into a Rate Stabilization Fund, and these 
revenues would offset the revenues received through sewer 
service charges by lowering the originally projected rate 
increases in sewer service charges. The amount of revenues 
appropriated to the Rate Stabilization Fund would be subject 
to annual budgetary appropriations by the Board of 
Supervisors. Attachment I shows the amounts which are 
anticipated to be allocated to the Rate Stabilization Fund and 
the Working Capital Fund over the next five fiscal years, 
including a comparison of the proposed monthly sewer 
service charge rates with and without the establishment of a 
Working Capital Fund. In addition to the previously noted 
savings of approximately $20.5 million which would be 
achieved over the term of the bonds, according to Mr. Robert 
Hesse of the Department of Public Works (DPW), an 
additional one-time budgetary savings of approximately $19 
million would be realized during FY 1992-93 which would 
result from provisions of the proposed refunded "junior lion" 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

54 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



bonds which no longer require budgeting of debt service 
payments one year in advance. The CAO proposes to request 
that $19 million be appropriated into the Rate Stabilization 
Fund by the end of FY 1992-93 to be financed through the 
savings which are anticipated to be available through the 
proposed refinancing plan. 

3. As noted on Attachment I, without the proposed refunding 
plan, the projected annual average monthly sewer service 
charge rates for FY 1993-94 are anticipated to increase to 
$12.74 from $10.53 monthly, or approximately a 21 percent 
increase, versus an increase to $11.58 from $10.53 monthly or 
approximately a 10 percent increase after the proposed 
refunding plan, including the establishment of a Working 
Capital Fund and a Rate Stabilization Fund. The average 
monthly sewer service charge rate for FY 1993-94 is projected 
to increase to $11.48 from $10.53 or approximately a nine 
percent increase without the establishment of a Working 
Capital Fund, and thereby placing all of the surplus revenues 
into a Rate Stabilization Fund only, which would further 
lower sewer service charges. These projected sewer service 
charge rates, however, would be subject to Board of 
Supervisors approval during the annual rate setting 
procedure. 

4. As noted above, the proposed Working Capital Fund would 
account for the timing lags between the time when 
expenditures are made from the Clean Water Enterprise 
Fund and when cash is received from its customers, and 
therefore provide for a positive cash flow. Although the CWP 
did report negative cash balances for six months during 
fiscal year 1991-92, these negative cash flows will be offset 
during FY 1992-93 through the 19 percent rate increase in 
sewer service charge rates for fiscal year 1992-93 (assuming 
water conservation does not increase to higher levels), and 
through the anticipated decreased expenditures as a result of 
lower debt service requirements. As noted on Attachment I, 
the projected average monthly sewer service charge rates 
would increase to $11.48 or approximately a nine percent 
increase without the establishment of a Working Capital 
Fund, versus an increase to $11.58 or approximately a 10 
percent increase with the establishment of a Working Capital 
Fund. 

5. As noted, the City Attorney is currently drafting the final 
language to create the establishment of a Working Capital 
Fund. The Budget Analyst has been advised by the CAO's 
Office that the language would include a clause which would 
require a minimum balance of $2 million for any 
unanticipated negative cash flows or emergency 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

55 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

expenditures which are required. The Budget Analyst has 
not yet fully reviewed the final language of the proposed 
resolution which would establish this Fund. 

6. The Budget Analyst recommends approval of the proposed 
refinancing plan in concept in order to reduce interest 
payments on outstanding debt and also and thereby reduce 
future customer rate increases through the establishment of 
a Rate Stabilization Fund. However, the Budget Analyst 
believes that because the proposed resolutions would provide 
for the establishment of a Working Capital Fund within the 
Clean Water Enterprise Fund, which would have an effect on 
subsequent sewer service charge rates, the establishment of 
this new fund is a separate policy matter for the Board of 
Supervisors. Furthermore, the CAO's Office has indicated 
that there will be language within the proposed resolution 
(File 170-92-9) which would require a minimum balance 
within the Working Capital Fund which would preclude the 
Board of Supervisors from providing these monies for other 
purposes, such as directing these monies to the Rate 
Stabilization Fund to further reduce sewer service charge 
rates. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends that the 
proposed resolution (File 170-92-9) be amended to delete the 
clause which would require a minimum balance of $2 
million in the Working Capital Fund. All of the revenues 
which would be appropriated to this Fund should be subject to 
annual appropriation decisions by the Board of Supervisors. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolutions (Files 170-92-9 and 170-92- 
9.1). However, the establishment of a new fund, a Working 
Capital Fund, which would have an effect on subsequent 
sewer service charge rates, is a separate policy matter for the 
Board of Supervisors. If the Board of Supervisors approves 
the establishment of a Working Capital Fund, amend the 
proposed resolution (File 170-92-9) to delete the clause which 
would require a minimum balance of $2 million. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

56 



Attainment 



§ ^ 



5T 3 
— to 

Tl CD 



o 


> 


o 




ID 








o 




3 


Tl 




(D 


to 




<n 


C 


01 


1 


t 


n 


F3 


-> 


© 


co 



** S3 

-J 2 

O JD 

3 o 



S 2 



^ ~ 



Tl Tl 


Tl 


Tl 


Tl 


5 5- 

3 c _ 


Tt 


Tl 


Tl 


Tl 


Tl 


S 33 > 


Tl 


Tl 


Tl 


Tl 


Tl 


TJ 


03 




■< < 

CO CD 


■< 

CO 


■< 

CO 


< 

CD 


-< 

CD 


■< 
CD 


< 
CO 


< 

co 


< 
CO 


-< 

CD 


< 
CO 


< 
CD 


■< 
CD 


< 
CD 


3 


o 

to 
a. 




05 cn 


«• 


CO 


ro 


CD 


cn 


*. 


CO 


ro 


5 a. "" 


CD 


cn 


*i 


co 


ro 


3 




CD CD 


CD 


CD 


CD 


£> — 33 


CD 


CD 


CD 


CD 


CO 


O <° 
■a. S 

to. IT 


CO 


CD 


CD 


CD 


<b 




> 




■~J CD 


cn 


£*. 


CO 


o g s- 

I- * a 

SB 5' 3 


~J 


CD 


cn 


-U 


CO 


--J 


CD 


cn 


-t^ 


co 


■< 
CO 


3 
o 
< 


































CD 














Tt 












T| 












ro 














c 












C 


























3 












3 


























Q. 












a. 
















































TJ 
































< : 7? 


t/J to 


m 


60 


to 


CO 


60 


to 


60 


to 


to 


to 


to 


60 


to 




a> o 
































I s. 


cd cn 


cn 


cn 


CO 


CD 


cn 


cn 


*■ 


CO 


00 


-~J 


CD 


cn 


CO 




-» .&. 


cn 


•fe 


■vl 


— L 


CO 


o 


^1 


^J 


— » 


cn 


^J 


o 


ro 




5>::.i 


--J CO 


CO 


_l 


^J 


~-J 


o 


CD 


-J 


~J 


cn 


CD 


ro 


co 


CD 




CO 


o o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




m 

X 

■a 


to to 


69 


to 


<ft 


to 


69 


to 


to 


to 


-to 


CO 


</» 


69 


to 




5 -> 

Q- 2. 
































cr> cn 


*i 


CO 




CD 


cn 


-c 


CO 




~j 


CD 


CD 


*. 


ro 




— " to 


-" ro 


CD 


■«J 


—L 


— * 


ro 


CD 


^J 


— k 


CO 


CD 


— » 


cn 


00 




c — 


-vj ^ 


^J 


cn 


-vl 


-vl 


-t^ 


-nJ 


cn 


■< 


ro 


£h 


ro 


O 


CD 




S 


o o 


o 


o 

60 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 

CO 


o 
to 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 




CO 

to 
cr 

— 3) 
Si' 2i 


to 


69 




N> 






to 


















to CD 


<f> ~» 


CD 


CD 


CD 


to 


to 


ro 


o 


CO 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 




ZT. 


P bo 


cn 


CD 


o 


o 


CD 


o 


ro 


b 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




O 


o o 


o 


o 


o 


"o 
t/» 


O 

to 


o 
to 


o 

69 


o 
to 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




3 

O 

Tl 5' 
cr jo 

3 

^ o 


tO tO 


60 


60 


to 


~-J 


vl 


^J 


^1 


-J 


<f> 


to 


60 


co 


<f> 




to 


o o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 




TJ 


o o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




to 

s 

O 

-<: to 


&i to 


to 


to 


CO 


to 


to 


to 


60 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 




to ® 
































&. CO 


ro 


-•• 


o 


cn 


^ 


l\i 


-» 


o 


CD 


CD 


■u 


ro 


o 




00 CD 


cn 


-C^ 


CD 


o 


o 


~-J 


cn 


cn 


CD 


_L 


~vl 


-J 


cn 






CD *. 




CD 


CO 


00 




->■ 


CO 


CO 


CD 


o 


-t>. 


.&. 


CO 




3 

CD 

3 T3 
o ® 

S 8 


CO co 


CD 


CD 


CD 


-vl 


o 


O 


o 


CD 


CO 


CD 


cn 


ro 


CD 




CD 


to o 
5§ S? 


o 


o 


o 


CD 


o 


o 


o 


o 


Cn 


k> 


co 


o 


o 






,',-" 


5? 


o 5 


5? 


0> 


5? 


o ? 


S? 


5 s 


5? 


„ p 


o'° 


5? 







57 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Item 14 - File 186-92-2 



Department Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) 

Item: Resolution authorizing Chief Administrative Officer to 

negotiate for development of a new City office building and to 
accept and expend donation of funds to offset City costs 
incurred through negotiations. 

Description: The City owns three parcels on McAllister Street across from 

City Hall including the parking lot at the northwest corner of 
Polk and McAllister Streets, the adjoining property at 450 
McAllister Street (City Hall Annex) and the property at 460 
McAllister Street. The City is considering building a new City 
office building that spans the three parcels and the two story 
Society of California Pioneers building at 456 McAllister 
Street (see map in Attachment I) to house various City 
departments and offices that are currently located in several 
privately owned buildings in the Civic Center area. 

The City is also considering building a second City office 
building between Redwood Street and Golden Gate Avenue on 
land that is privately owned. The second office building site is 
currently occupied by other buildings including the Stars 
Restaurant. By developing these new office buildings, the City 
could consolidate City departments and offices in the City- 
owned buildings resulting in the elimination of rent 
currently paid for privately-owned Civic Center office space. 

The Real Estate Department states that the amount of 
savings depends on which City departments and offices 
would occupy the new buildings and that a current estimate 
of savings has not been made. In previous reports to the 
Board of Supervisors on this subject, the Real Estate 
Department has estimated rental savings of approximately 
$2.3 million for the single building to be developed on 
McAllister Street. 

The City has purchased options for calendar years 1991 and 
1992 at $28,800 each year that froze the purchase price for the 
actual air rights over the two story Society of California 
Pioneers building at 456 McAllister Street at a fixed price of 
$360,000 plus $5,000 for escrow fees. The air rights would be 
necessary in order to construct the new six story office 
building on the three City-owned parcels and over the two 
story Society of California Pioneers building. 

The proposed resolution would authorize the Chief 
Administrative Officer (CAO) to enter into exclusive 
negotiations with the firm, 450 McAllister Street Associates, 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



for the purpose of determining the extent to which a public- 
private venture can develop the new City office building on 
terms more advantageous to the City than those the City 
could achieve if the City were to develop the new office 
building solely on its own. 

The firm of 450 McAllister Street Associates was selected 
through a Request For Proposal (RFP) process. Six proposals 
were received from private developers by the March 13, 1992, 
deadline and the CAO's selection committee selected Hines 
Corporation based on assessment of points for qualifications 
required by the RFP. However, the 450 McAllister Street 
Associates firm was ranked highest by the Human Rights 
Commission after additional points were added for Minority 
Business Enterprise (MBE) and Women Business Enterprise 
(WBE) participation. Based on a maximum of 100 points for 
qualification, Hines received a raw score of 85.56 points and 
450 McAllister received a raw score of 83.56 points. However, 
based on the reasons contained in a letter from the Human 
Rights Commission (Attachment 2), 450 McAllister Streets 
was ranked highest by the Human Rights Commission 
resulting in 87.74 points or 2.18 more points than the Hines 
Corporation. Regarding the final selection of 450 McAllister 
Street Associates over the Hines Corporation, Mr. Rudy 
Nothenberg, Chief Administrative Officer, states, "I 
committed to the proposers and the (selection) committee that 
my selection would be based on the scores resulting from the 
selection process as modified by the Human Rights 
Commission. When the final scores were presented to me by 
the Human Rights Commission, 450 McAllister Street 
Associates was the clear winner." 

450 McAllister Street Associates consists of three firms, 1) 
Koll Construction Company, (Donald M. Koll of Newport 
Beach, California, sole proprietor), 2) WDG Ventures, a MBE 
firm, (operated by Charles and Paula Collins) and 3) 
Sagamore Associates (Robert Mendelsohn, President). 

The proposed resolution would also authorize the CAO to 
accept and expend donations from 450 McAllister Street 
Associates to reimburse the City for costs incurred by City 
departments as a result of the exclusive negotiations for 
determining the economic feasibility of the public-private 
venture. Mr. Jack Moerschbaecher of the CAO's Office 
indicates that the amount of costs that City departments 
would incur as a result of the negotiations or the amount that 
450 McAllister Street Associates would donate to reimburse 
those costs is not known at this time. Based on the Budget 
Analyst's inquiry, Mr. Moerschbaecher stated that it would 
be appropriate for the Finance Committee to reserve any 

BOARD OF SI TPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

59 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

monies donated, pending review of such City costs. 
According to Mr. Moerschbaecher, a determination of the 
costs and donation to be made would be the first phase of the 
negotiations to insure that there is no net cost to the City for 
the proposed negotiations. 

Mr. Moerschbaecher states that neither the proposed 
resolution nor the determinations resulting from the 
proposed negotiations would obligate the City in any way to 
continue a relationship with 450 McAllister Street Associates 
for the development of a new office building. Also, by 
accepting donations from 450 McAllister Street Associates for 
reimbursement of the costs incurred by City departments in 
the negotiation process, there would be no cost to the City as a 
result of the proposed negotiations. 

Comments: 1. Mr. Calvin Malone (retired), formerly of the City's Capital 

Improvement Advisory Committee, previously reported that 
the construction of a new building to house City offices on the 
three City-owned parcels utilizing the air rights over the 
Society of California Pioneers building is consistent with the 
Development Program for the Civic Center previously 
approved by the Board of Supervisors in December of 1987 
(Resolution 1,125-87). 

2. The Board of Supervisors has previously authorized the 
acquisition of options to purchase air rights over the 
California Society of Pioneers Building for calendar year 1991 
(File 96-91-2) for $28,800 and for calendar year 1992 (File 96-92- 
3), also at a cost of $28,800 (total expenditures to date for air 
rights purchase options of $57,600). Purchase of these options 
would enable the City to purchase the air rights over the 456 
McAllister Street at a fixed price of $360,000 plus $5,000 for 
escrow fees. 

3. The two City-owned buildings at 450 and 460 McAllister 
Street that would be demolished to build a new office building 
currently house the Department of City Planning and 
portions of the Department of Public Works Engineering 
Division in approximately 46,500 square feet of usable space. 
The proposed new office building would have approximately 
180,000 square feet of usable space. Mr. Tony DeLucchi of the 
Real Estate Department reports that there is no currently 
established plan as to which City departments would be 
moved into the new office building. According to the Real 
Estate Department, the City currently rents approximately 
334,000 square feet of office space in the Civic Center area at 
an approximate annual rental cost of $4.9 million. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

60 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



4. As stated above, the proposed resolution does not obligate 
the City to engage 450 McAllister Street Associates to develop 
a new office building. Even if the proposed negotiations result 
in a determination that a public-private venture to develop the 
new office building is economically advantageous to the City, 
the City continues to have no further obligation to 450 
McAllister Street Associates. 

5. Mr. Moerschbaecher indicates that proposals for all other 
aspects pertaining to development of the new office building, 
including financing and selection of a developer, and 
proposals pertaining to development of other City office 
buildings adjacent to the proposed development would be the 
subject of separate legislation to be submitted for approval to 
the Board of Supervisors. 

6. In order to insure that the Board of Supervisors maintains 
control over any donations that the City might receive as a 
result of the proposed resolution to accept and expend 
donations from the 450 McAllister Street Associates, a 
reserve should be placed on any such donations pending a 
report as to the disposition of the monies donated. The CAO's 
office agrees that such a reserve is appropriate because the 
amounts involved are not known at this time. 



Recommendation; 



Amend the proposed resolution to reserve any donations 
received from the 450 McAllister Street Associates for 
reimbursement of City departmental costs resulting from the 
proposed negotiations, pending review of such costs by the 
Finance Committee. Approve the proposed resolution as 
amended. 



cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 




Harvey M. Rose 



Clerk of the Board 

Chief Administrative Officer 

Controller 

Kent Sims 

Jean Mariani 

Barbara Kolesar 

Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

61 



Attachment 1 



VAN NESS AVE. 



CO 

Z 
< 

2 





120' 


o 






6 


in 


CITY 


Kt 


affic Engineering Bldg 


n 


4,125 «q. ft. 5 


^SOCIETY 0F_ CALIFORNIA 


o 


PIONEERS* 




4,125 «q. ft. ^ 




CITY 


In 


City Hall Annex 


o" 
9 


3,250 aq. ft. 




3 




CITY 




Parking Lot 


O 


16,500 aq. ft. 


f5 






120' 2 





7 


8 




9 


K 






(/) 






a 






o 






o 




10 


£ 






c 






IU 






cc 






35*— - 




1 



> 
< 

tu 
h 
< 

O 

z 

LU 
O 
-J 
O 
CD 



POLK ST. 

SITE MAP 

BLOCK 766, LOTS 2. 3, 4, & 5 

PROPERTY OWNED IN FEE BY CITY 28,875 sq. ft. 

PROPOSED AIR RIGHTS ACQUISITION 4,125 

TOTAL AREA 33,000 sq. ft. 



62 



City and County of San Francisco 




Edwin M. Lee 
Director 



Attachment 2 

Human Rights Commissior 

Office of Minority/Women Business Enterprii 
Office of Contract Compliance 
Office of Dispute Resolution 



July 27, 1992 



Harvey Rose 

Budget Analyst 

Board of Supervisors 

City and County of San Francisco] 

1390 Market Street 

San Francisco, CA. 94102 



Re : Selection of 450 McAllister Associates 

Dear Mr. Rose: 

In response to your office's request this morning, I am able 
to provide you with the following information in Director Ed Lee's 
absence . 

450 McAllister Associates was recommended to the Chief 
Administrative Officer based on the scoring of the selection panel, 
a copy of which is attached. 

450 McAllister Associates was granted a 5% preference because 
they were determined to be a bonafide joint venture with a 
certified Minority Business Enterprise (MBE). The MBE was WDG 
Ventures Inc. which has been certified by the Human Rights 
Commission . 

I hope this is sufficient information for your purposes. 
Please call me at 252-2505 if you have any further questions. 




cc: Scott Emblidge, City Attorney 



(415)252-2500 



1170 Market St., #500 

63 



San Francisco, CA 94102-49C 



lS" 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 

Item lg - File 147-92-2.1 



ittWLic JLibrary, 'Documents CDept. 
WFB^ Qerry %gtk 

DOC > »»*"*••■•«! ncDj 

REVISED JUL 3 19g2 



SAN FRANCIbuU 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 

Note: This item was continued from the Finance Committee meeting on July 15, 
1992. 

Department: Public Library 

Item: Resolution authorizing the City Librarian to accept and 

expend funds not to exceed $696,579 available through the 
California State Library from Title II of the Library Services 
and Construction Act, which includes indirect costs in the 
amount of $43,997, or five percent of the total grant. 

Grant Amount: Not to exceed $696,579 

Source of Funds: Federal grant funds through the California State Library 

Grant Period: January, 1993 to April, 1995 

Description: The Board of Supervisors previously approved legislation 

authorizing the Library to apply for the proposed grant funds 
in an amount not to exceed $879,935, (File 147-92-2). The 
Public Library advises that, in the interim, the State has 
notified the Department that the allocation will be in an 
amount not to exceed $696,579 or $183,356 less than the 
original not to exceed amount of $879,935. 

The Public Library advises that the proposed grant funds 
would be used as a match to expand the scope of renovation 
work for the Mission Branch Library. The Public Library has 
currently identified $829,894 in 1988 Library Improvement 
Bond Funds, $100,000 in Earthquake Safety Bond Program 
Phase II funds and $29,935 in General Fund monies 
(included in the 1992-93 budget) for a total of $959,829. The 
$959,829 will be used primarily to pay for seismic upgrading 
electrical work, handicapped accessibility and asbestos 
abatement. According to the Public Library, the proposed 
matching grant, which would bring the total amount 
available for renovation to $1,656,408, would be used to expand 
the scope of renovation work to include (1) expansion of the 
building to the property line to provide a 25 percent increase 
to the public area of the Mission Branch and to improve the 
quality of staff work spaces, (2) creation of a single level on 
the first floor to provide an additional enhancement to 
handicapped accessibility, (3) expansion of the Children's 
Department to provide for a reading room area and a 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



separate area for special activities and (4) creation of an area 
for tutoring and public access to microcomputer use. 



Project Budget: 







1988 Library 








Improvement 








Bond Funds 






Earthquake Safety 






Bond Program 






Federal 


Phase II 






Grant 


Funds and 






Funds 


General Funds 


Total 


Design Phase 








Programming 


$30,000 


$30,000 


$60,000 


Estimator 


5,000 


5,000 


10,000 


Bureau of Architecture 


30,000 


30,000 


60,000 


Structural Engineer 


20,000 


20,000 


40,000 


Mechanical Engineer 


10,000 


10,000 


20,000 


Electrical Engineer 


10,000 


10,000 


20,000 


Asbestos Investigator 


5,500 


5,500 


11,000 


Surveys 


1.500 


1.500 


3.000 


Subtotal 


$112,000 


$112,000 


$224,000 


Construction Phase 








Construction 


$414,750 


$649,538 $1,064,288 


Construction Management 60,000 


60,000 


120,000 


Permit Fees 


1,500 


1,500 


3,000 


Soil Tests 


5,000 


5,000 


10,000 


Art Enrichment 


10,000 


10,000 


20,000 


Asbestos Abatement 


16,500 


16,500 


33,000 


Contingency 


42.000 


75.356 


117.356 


Subtotal 


$549,750 


$817,894 $1,367,644 


Equipment 








Data Processing 








Equipment 





$29,935 


$29,935 


Indirect Costs 


$34,829 





$34,829 


Total 


$696,579 


$959,829 $1,656,408 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

22 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



Required Match: 



Indirect Costs: 
Comments: 



$696,579. As reflected above, the Public Library has identified 
$959,829 of previously appropriated 1988 Library 
Improvement bond funds, Earthquake Safety Bond Program 
Phase II Funds and General Funds monies included in the 
1992-93 budget that would be used as local matching funds, or 
$263,250 more than the $696,579 required amount of matching 
funds. 

$34,829 (see Comment #1) 

1. The Public Library reports that the amount of $43,997 
included in the proposed legislation for indirect costs is 
incorrect. The correct amount for indirect costs is $34,829 as 
reflected in the Project Budget above, or five percent of the 
total grant award of $696,579. Therefore, the proposed 
legislation should be amended to include $34,829 instead of 
$43,997 for indirect costs in both the title and body. 

2. As noted above, the proposed grant has a required match 
of $696,579. This match is not reflected in the title or body of 
the proposed legislation. Therefore, the proposed legislation 
should be amended to reflect the $696,579 in the title and body 
of the proposed legislation. 

3. The Public Library projects that the renovation on the 
Mission Branch Library will commence by January of 1994. 
The Library anticipates that an Invitation for Bids will be 
issued by December of 1993, to acquire the necessary 
construction contractor. The Budget Analyst recommends 
that the proposed legislation be amended to place $456,750 in 
grant monies for the construction contract ($414,750) and 
contingencies ($42,000) on reserve pending the Public Library 
submitting cost details and the MBE/WBE status of the 
contract. 

4. Attached is a grant summary, as prepared by the Public 
Library, for the proposed grant. 

5. The Public Library has prepared a Disability Access 
Checklist for this proposed grant, which is included in the 
file. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed legislation to include $34,829 instead 
of $43,997 for indirect costs in both the title and body of the 
proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

23 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 29, 1992 



2. Amend the proposed legislation to reflect the required 
match of $696,579 in the title and body of the proposed 
legislation. 

3. Amend the proposed legislation to reserve $456,750 for the 
construction contract and contingencies pending the Public 
Library's submission of contractor cost details and the 
MBE/WBE status of the contract. 

4. Approve the legislation as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

24 



07-08-92 .::..-:/ ;;.,V S.F. PUBLIC LIBRARY Attachment 

Page 1 of 2 



Pile Number 



GRANT APPLICATION INFORMATION FORM 



To: The Board of Supervisors 
Attn: Clerk of the Board 

The following describes the grant referred to in the accompanying 
resolution. 

Department. Libc * c y 

Contact person t Kathy Page Phone*: 557-4210 

Project title: Mission Branch Expansion/Renovation 

Grant source: Library Services and Construction Act/ Title II (Fe deral) 

Proposed ( x New / Continuation) Grant Project Summary: 

Under the Library Improvement Bonds of 1988/ the San Francisco Public 
Library renovating and improving several branch libraries. This grant 
seeks to expand the scope of work for the Mission Branch Library/ the 
Library's largest branch in the Southeast section of the city. The 
grant would enable the branch public area to increase by 25% and 
significantly improve the quality of staff work spaces. Without the 
grant/ the Library will be able to upgrade the building seismically and 
make it handicapped accessible/ nor there will be an opportunity to improve 
the service level provided at this facility. 



Amount of grant funding applied forn: $696,579 

Maximum funding amount available: 



Required matching funds: , $959,829 

Number of positions created and funded: ____ 

Amount to be spent on contractual services: 

Will contractual services be put out to bid? Yea 



25 



■08-92 07 : 3i.yi tKUM S.F. PUBLIC LldMK! Page 2 cf 2 



Grant Application Information Form p. 2 



Term of grant: January 1993 - April 1995 



Date Department was notified of available funds s December 2, 1991 

Application Due Date: April 6, 1992 

Grant funding Guidelines and Options (from RFP, grant announcement 
or appropriations legislation)! 



The Library Servicee and Construction Act is intended to assist states to 
establish, extend and improve public library services in areas that are 
without these services or in which these services are inadequate. Inadequate 
facilities are those which do not meet locally adopted community service 
standards, do not provide easy access and use by physically handicapped 
persons, and do not provide for energy conservation or new technologies. 1992 
projects will be measured against the priority that the community serves a 
minority population which significantly exceeds the state average. These 
projects can be for additions to existing buildings and for remodeling 
existing library buildings to provide handicapped access, introduction of new 
technologies, or remodeling for safe working environments or energy 
conservation. To meet this priority, populations in the service area of the 
facility must have a combined Black, American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, Asian and 
Pacific Islander (all groups), and Spanish origin populations as defined in 
the 1980 Census, that is at least 502 of the total population in the facility 
service area. This program requires a minimum of at least 50: in non-Federal 
matching funds. This funding must be guaranteed. SFPL will provide this 

funding from the Library Improvement Bond. 

v 

Assessment of Need for Grant Funding: 

Current service space in the branch library does not meet standards for a 
community the size of the Mission. The branch is limited in seating and 
shelving space. In addition, the current floor plan requires extra staffing 
and creates security and safety hazards. The adult book collection is not 
wheelchair accessible. There is not public meeting space. The Library 
Improvement Bond funding does not allow for site expansion or extensive 
remodeling. This funding would allow the Library to significantly expand the 
scope of work at the branch while greatly improving the facility's for public 
use and safety. 



Department Head approval: 



%LM tc € 



Kenneth E. D«wlin 
City Librarian 



26 



*a 



CALENDAR 



MEETING OF 

FINANCE COMMITTEE 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

/ 

///// 
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1992 - 2:00 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

PRESENT: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ AND HALLINAN 

ABSENT: SUPERVISOR MIGDEN 

CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 



NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 
counter in the Office of the Clerk of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 



CONSENT CALENDAR 



All matters listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are considered to be 
routine by the Finance Committee, and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote 
of the Committee. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a 
member of the Committee or a member of the public so requests, in which event the 
matter shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a separate 
item. 



(a) File 25-92-25 . [Prop J Contract] Resolution concurring with Controller's 

certification that services of the Court Management System Coordinator can 
be practically performed by private contractor for lower cost than similar 
work services performed by City and County employees. (Municipal Court) 



ACTION: Recommended. 



f\UG S 1992 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



(b) File 146-92-53 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the 

Department of Public Health, Central Administration, to apply for a grant of 
up to $420,000, which includes indirect costs in the amount of $38,000, based 
on ten percent of direct costs, from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the 
Northern California Grantmakers, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the Hearst Foundations, the Richard and 
Rhoda Goldman Fund, the San Francisco Foundation, the Gannett Communities 
Fund, the Pacific Telesis Foundation, the Ernst D. Van Loben Sels/Eleanor 
Slate Van Loben Sels Charitable Foundation, the Wells Fargo Contributions 
Program, the Crescent Porter Hale Foundation, the Clorox Company 
Foundation, the Walter and Elise Haas Fund, the McBean Family Foundation, 
the Montgomery Street Foundation, the Koret Foundation and the Bernard 
Osher Foundation for funding for the Health of the City proposal. 
(Department of Public Health) 

ACTION: Amended on lines 3 and 13, by replacing "$38,000" with "$42,000". 
Further amended on line 7, after "Wells Fargo", by adding 
"Corporate". Recommended as amended. New title: "Authorizing 
the Department of Public Health, Central Administration, to apply 
for a grant of up to $420,000, which includes indirect costs in the 
amount of $42,000, based on ten percent of direct costs, from the 
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Northern California 
Grantmakers, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, Pacific Gas 
and Electric Company, the Hearst Foundations, the Richard and 
Rhoda Goldman Fund, the San Francisco Foundation, the Gannett 
Communities Fund, the Pacific Telesis Foundation, the Ernst D. 
Van Loben Sels/Eleanor Slate Van Loben Sels Charitable 
Foundation, the Wells Fargo Corporate Contributions Program, the 
Crescent Porter Hale Foundation, the Clorox Company Foundation, 
the Walter and Elise Haas Fund, the McBean Family Foundation, 
the Montgomery Street Foundation, the Koret Foundation and the 
Bernard Osher Foundation for funding for the Health of the City 
proposal." 



(c) File 101-90-78.3 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, 
Department of Public Works, Earthquake Safety Program Phase 2, in an 
amount totalling $357,478, San Francisco General Hospital for construction 
contract for partial earthquake damage repairs throughout the hospital 
complex ($324,980 construction contract and $32,498 a 10% construction 
contingency for changes during construction). (Department of Public Works) 



ACTION: Release of $357,478 recommended. Filed. 



(d) File 94-91-4.4 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, 

Public Utilities Commission, in the amount of $3,793,870, to fund one of the 
capital improvement projects, Municipal Railway Contract No. MR-898, 14 
Mission Line Trolley Overhead Reconstruction - Phase A (Persia to Daly City 
Loop). (Public Utilities Commission) 

ACTION: Release of $3,793,870 recommended. Filed. 



(e) File 94-92-1.1 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, 
Public Utilities Commission, in an amount totalling $159,060, ($97,560 to be 
transferred to the City's Department of Parking and Traffic to upgrade the 
signal controllers and pedestrian warning devices and $61,500 for the City's 
Purchaser to issue requisition orders for the sensors and interface boxes). 
(Public Utilities Commission) 

ACTION: Release of $158,140 recommended. Filed. 

(f) File 148-91-1.2 . [Release of Funds] Requesting release of reserved funds, 
Department of Public Works, in the of amount $858,854, for roadway work on 
City streets in accordance with the State-Local Transportation Partnership 
Program, 2nd Cycle. (Department of Public Works) 

ACTION: Release of $858,854 recommended. Filed. 

REGULAR CALENDAR 

2. File 100-92-5 . Hearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the revenue 
of the City and County of San Francisco. (Supervisor Migden) 

(Continued from 7/29/92) 

ACTION: Hearing held. Continued to August 12, 1992, meeting. 

3. File 47-92-5 . [Garage Lease Documents] Ordinance approving and adopting 
Polk-Bush Garage legal documents and authorization for management agreement. 
(Real Estate Department) 

(Continued from 7/29/92) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

4. File 31-92-3. (Employee Replacement] Resolution approving immediate filling of 
vacated position of one Classification 0140 Chief, Fire Department. RO #92040. 
(Fire Commission) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

5. File 31-92-4 . [Employee Replacement] Resolution approving immediate filling of 
vacated position of one Classification 0150 Deputy Chief, Fire Department. RO 
#92034. (Fire Commission) 

ACTION: Recommended. 

6. File 68-92-4.1 . [Home Program] Resolution approving procedures for allocating 
Home Program Funds, and authorizing the Mayor of the City and County of San 
Francisco to encumber and authorize release of a grant of Home Program Funds 
from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for a total amount not 
to exceed Eight Million, Two Hundred Six Thousand Dollars ($8,206,000). Direct and 
indirect costs associated with the acceptance of these grant funds will be paid by 
Community Development Block Grant Funds. (Mayor's Office of Economic Planning 
and Development) 

ACTION: Continued to August 12, 1992, meeting (at the request of Department). 



x-5 



CITY AND COUNTY 



^^uBCic Libranj, "Documents 'Dept. 



OF san f: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

// 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 



August 3, 1992 



TO: Finance Committee 

FROM; budget Analyst - j/*w^foA/-J 

SUBJECT: August 5, 1992 Finance Committee Meeting 



DOCUMENTS PEPT. 
AUG 041992 

SAN FRANCISuO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Item la - File 25-92-25 

Department: 

Item: 



Services to 
be Performed: 



Description: 



Municipal Court 

Resolution concurring with Controller's Certification of 
Costs required by Charter Section 8.300-1 (Proposition J) 
that services of the Court Management System Coordinator 
can continue to be practically performed by a private 
contractor for a lower cost than similar work performed by 
City and County employees. 



Coordinator of the Court Management System is 
responsible for various technical, programming, and 
analytical functions related to the Court Management 
System (CMS) data base. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for Court 
Management System Coordinator services in fiscal year 
1992-93 would result in estimated savings as follows: 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



Citv Operated Service Costs 

Salary 

Fringe Benefits 
Total 

Contracted Service Cost 

Estimated Savings 



Lowest 

Salary 

Step 


Highest 

Salary 

Step 


$50,869 

12.717 

$63,586 


$60,526 

15,131 

$75,657 


$47,000 


$47,000 



$16,586 



$28,657 



Comments: 



1. Court Management System Coordinator services were 
first certified as required by Charter Section 8.300-1 in 1978 
and have continued to be provided by an outside contractor 
since then. 

3. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses, including the MBE/WBE status of 
the contractor is attached. 

4. The Contracted Service Cost for 1992-93 is $47,000 based 
on the existing Court Management System Coordinator 
contractor costs. 

5. Mr. Park-Li reports that the current Court Management 
System Coordinator contractor, the Shaffer Consulting 
Company, was originally selected through an interview 
process, and the subsequent approval by the Court 
Management Policy Committee. Since the initial selection 
process, the Municipal Court has renewed the contract for 
the Court Management System Coordinator services for the 
past three years with the Shaffer Consulting Company. 
The term of this contract will expire on June 30, 1993. 

6. The contractor, Shaffer Consulting Company, is not 
certified as an MBE or WBE. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SI JPERVLSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Attachment 



CHARTER 8.300-1 (Proposition J) QUESTIONNAIRE 

Department Municipal Court For Time Period FY 1992-93 
Contract Services Court Management System Coordinator 

1) Who performed services prior to contracting out? 

Coordinator services were originally provided through the LEAA 
grant during development of the Court Management System (CMS) . 

2) Number of City employees laid off as result of 
contracting out? 

None. 

3) Explain disposition of employees if they were not laid 
off. 

Coordinator has made the use of CMS more adaptable to office 
operations. City employees began to benefit from computer support* 

4) What percent of a City employee's time is spent on 
services to be contracted out? 

None. The coordinator position crosses over nine City departments 
in supporting and using CMS. 

5) How long have the services been contracted out? 
Since 1978. 

6 ) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J 
certification? 

The year when Proposition J became legal in San Francisco. 

7) How will contract services meet the goals of your 
MBE/WBE Action Plan? 

To meet our needs. 



Department Representative 
Telephone: 554-4516 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Item lb - File 146-92-53 



Department: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 



Sources of Funds: 



Project: 
Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH), 
Central Administration 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health to 
apply for a grant, which includes indirect costs of $38,000 
based on 10 percent of direct costs, from various private 
foundations and corporations for funding the Health of the 
City proposal. 

Up to $420,000 

An estimated 18 to 24-month period 

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Northern 
California Grantmakers, the Henry J. Kaiser Family 
Foundation, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the Hearst 
Foundations, the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund, the 
San Francisco Foundation, the Gannett Communities Fund, 
the Pacific Telesis Foundation, the Ernst D. Van Loben 
Sels/Eleanor Slate Van Loben Sels Charitable Foundation, 
the Wells Fargo Corporate Contribution Program, the 
Crescent Porter Hale Foundation, the Clorox Company 
Foundation, the Walter and Elise Haas Fund, the McBean 
Family Foundation, the Montgomery Street Foundation, the 
Koret Foundation and the Bernard Osher Foundation. 

The Health of the City Proposal 

The purpose of the proposed grant of up to $420,000 is to fund 
the implementation of a research project to assess the City's 
public health needs and the public and private health care 
services available to all San Franciscans, and to prepare a 
comprehensive report on the state of the health of the City. 
These efforts would represent the first time that the City has 
worked with both public and private health care providers to 
assess the full spectrum of the City's public and private 
health care, ranging from primary (or preventative care) to 
secondary (intervention and outpatient care) to tertiary (or 
acute or emergency) care. It is anticipated that such a 
project would analyze health care trends in the City over the 
past decade and make some projections about the City's 
health care for the next five years. Once completed, the 
comprehensive report on the state of the health of the City 
would be available to decisionmakers, health care 
professionals, and the general public. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



The DPH anticipates that a substantial portion of the 
proposed grant would be used to hire consultants to work 
with the DPH to perform the following: (1) an assessment of 
the existing public and private health care databases, which 
include information regarding the City's population, 
demographics, physician distribution, health care utilization 
and costs; (2) a selection of "quality" databases which provide 
useful information to the DPH; (3) an assessment of the 
DPH's role within the City's health care systems; and (4) an 
analysis of how to make the health care data useful and 
accessible to City managers and policymakers. Once 
established, the DPH intends to have the Department's own 
staff maintain and utilize such a health care information 
base, and to develop concrete health care projections and 
reports to enable the DPH to make more informed strategic 
decisions. 

The overall goals of the proposal are: (1) to reduce the 
unacceptably high incidence and prevalence of health care 
problems in the City; (2) to promote a flexible, responsive 
health care system; and (3) to establish an information base 
and analytical framework to facilitate strategic planning for 
the City's public and private primary, secondary and tertiary 
health care services. 

Presently, the DPH's various divisions track health care 
trends separately on a more limited basis than what would be 
funded under the proposed grant, and the DPH has limited 
knowledge about private health care in the City. The data 
that the DPH would compile under the proposed grant would 
not be duplicative of data currently available to the City, e.g., 
the 1990 U. S. Census data. 

The concept behind the Health of the City proposal largely 
originated from the DPH's executive staff and is supported, 
in concept, by the Ad Hoc Citizens Budget Advisory 
Committee, which was started by Dr. Raymond Baxter 
approximately two years ago when he became the Director of 
Health in San Francisco. The Committee is composed of 
various entities such as the California Nurses Association, 
the Clinic Consortium, the unions, and the San Francisco 
Chamber of Commerce, and is staffed by three DPH 
professionals, Dr. Baxter, Ms. Susan Ehrlich, and Ms. 
Deborah Alvarez. The Committee's function is to advise DPH 
on budget and policy issues. In addition, DPH's executive 
staff has been meeting on a regular basis with division heads 
within DPH, and the input of DPH's division heads will be an 
integral part of the Health of the City proposal. 



BOARD OF S UPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



Substantial cuts in Federal, State and local health care 
resources in recent years, increasing demands on the City's 
public health system, and health care cost containment 
measures are prompting the DPH to critically assess 
community health care needs and resources, set priorities, 
and target limited resources. The DPH believes the proposed 
project would be a critical first step in assessing health care 
in the City. 

The DPH is in the process of developing a concept paper for 
the proposed grant, which will be reviewed by both the DPH's 
division heads and by members of the Ad Hoc Citizens Budget 
Advisory Committee within the next few weeks. The grant 
proposal will be completed by approximately mid-September 
in 1992. 

Required Match: None. 

Indirect Costs: $42,000, or 10 percent of direct costs (see Comment No. 1). 

Comments: 1. Ms. Deborah Alvarez of the DPH advises that indirect costs 

will be approximately 10 percent of the total grant of $420,000, 
or $42,000, rather than $38,000, as stated in the title and the 
body of the proposed resolution. Therefore, the title and the 
body of the proposed resolution should be amended to reflect 
that indirect costs of approximately $42,000 are included in 
the proposed grant. 

2. Ms. Alvarez reports that as of the writing of this report, no 
budget for the project is available, but that it will be provided 
when the DPH requests the Finance Committee's 
authorization to accept and expend the grant funds. 
Included in the budget will be a list of health care consultants 
and approximate costs for performing the tasks required 
under the proposed grant. 

3. Ms. Alvarez reports that DPH plans to submit the grant 
proposal to the above-listed foundations and corporations in 
September and October, 1992. The notification dates for these 
foundations and corporations vary. Upon review of the grant, 
the various private foundations and corporations will 
determine whether or not they will support the proposed 
grant application and if so, how much each will contribute 
toward the proposed grant. 

4. Ms. Alvarez indicates that the DPH plans to request 
funding from the above-listed foundations and private 
corporations because these entities have funded grant 
proposals in the past which related to planning, 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



public/private partnerships, and strategic management 
information systems. To her knowledge, no other city has 
developed such a broad-based health care information system 
to aid in strategic planning efforts. 

5. Ms. Alvarez advises that the DPH will not be able to 
proceed with the Health of the City proposal without funding 
from the foundations and private corporations, and that the 
DPH does not plan to spend any new City monies for the 
project. However, it is possible that the DPH will redirect 
existing DPH staff to work on the project, Ms. Alvarez 
reports. It is anticipated that the proposed grant will fund 
both DPH staff and consultants to work on the project. 

6. The title of the proposed resolution includes the Wells 
Fargo Contributions Program while the body of the 
legislation includes the Wells Fargo Corporate Contributions 
Program. Therefore, the proposed resolution should be 
amended to reflect the correct name of the program, the 
Wells Fargo Corporate Contributions Program, in the title of 
the legislation. 

7. Ms. Alvarez reports that the proposed grant would enable 
the DPH to develop a microcomputer information base which 
could be updated every two to three years. The DPH projects 
that the proposed City database and report would consist of 
the following three components: (1) demographic, 
socioeconomic and health status characteristics of City 
residents, e.g., health status profiles of City neighborhoods; 
(2) a description of the City's health care delivery resources, 
linkages and ability to meet health care needs; and (3) an 
examination of the DPH's role within the City's health care 
delivery system. 

8. Attached is the Summary of Grant Request, as prepared 
by the DPH. 

9. The DPH has completed a Disability Access Checklist, 
which is in the file. 



Recommendations: 1. Amend the title and the body of the proposed resolution to 
reflect indirect costs of approximately $42,000. 

2. Amend the title of the proposed resolution to reflect the 
correct name of the Wells Fargo Corporate Contributions 
Program. 

3. Approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



; ran tor ^ee resolution Division Central Administration 

:on:,j C t Tcrson Section - idget and Planning, 

\ddrcss Contact Person Debbie Alvarez 

. Telephone 554-2629 



amount" Requested S up to $420,000 Application Deadline Not known 

"erm: From To Notification Expected . Not known 

lealth Commission Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Doard 



Ttrm Description: R cqucst to (apply for) (^p/^cr^fiya (new) XsMv^MtfoW/WVctefrWy bk&hkhktibhM k) 
io-*"*"**"*-"*' grant in the. amount of to $420 .OO from the period of Not known to Not known 

to provide implementation of a project to assess public health needs. 
and the- public and private health care services available to all San 
T , Summzn-; cc«w*-i^.»^.**»»«^ w »k~i l n^~*«4«-^ ^a,™^) Franciscans; and to prepare a comprehensive 

report, on the health of the city. 

The overall intent is to reduce the unacceptably high incidence and prevalence of- healt h 

problems in the community, to promote' a flexible and responsive health care system, and to 

establish an information base and analytical framework that facilitates strategic manage me n t 

and planning for the city's public and private primary, secondary and tertiary health ca re 

services. 

fTT. Outcome s/Qbif cti ve <:; 

QTo establish an ongoing information base that will inform decision making in the healt h 
service system. This database will describe the population of San Francisco, identity i ts 
health needs, analyze utilization patterns, and assess the- available resources to addres s 
these needs. 2) To assess recent and anticipated changes affecting the public health and (cont 

V, EtlSStS °f Reduction or Tfrmjngtion "f Thr*? *MJ "(}<:: 

Prnjpr-r will not he -initiated without grant funding. 



V. Financial Information: < 

Col. K Col. B Col. C Col. D Reo. Match Approved hv 

Two Yc-trs Ago Prit Yen/Orig. Propose-d Ccvnjc. 

Grant Amount up to $420,000 

Personnel 



Equipment HRANT BUDG ET 

Contract Svc. IS BEING 

Mat. £: Supp. , DEVELOPED . 

Facilities/Space 

Other 

Indirect Costs- ) 

EL n ?t? Prnr.ctina 
VTT, P. r <onn>l 

F/T CSC 

P/T CSC . 

Contractual 



Source(s) of non-gr2nt funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this grant: 

>Vill grant funded employees be retained after this grant terminates? If so, How? 

. Not determined. 

1 2HI L C"ntr ? r-ti; ? l <? . .- vi r »<:: Open Bid Sole Source t«f"S«««»«.«S«S»»*"«l*e«?*»*-5»l 



• Page 2 

Health Commission Summary u^ Grant Request 
Item III Outcomes/Objectives 



health care delivery system, and to publish a report that identifies these critical 
issues and provides a platform for future planning efforts. 3) To incorporate the 
results of this study into ongoing budget and management decision-making in order 
to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Health Department and promote greater 
collaboration between the public and private health care sector. 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Item lc - File 101-90-78.3 



Department: 



Item: 



Amount: 



Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Bureau of Architecture (BOA) 

San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH) 

Request for release of reserved funds, Department of Public 
Works, Earthquake Safety Program Phase 2, San Francisco 
General Hospital for a construction contract for partial 
earthquake damage repairs throughout the Hospital complex 
($324,980 construction contract and $32,498 a 10 percent 
construction contingency for changes during construction). 

$357,478 



Source of Funds: 1990 Earthquake Safety Bonds (Phase II) 

Description: The Board of Supervisors previously approved a 

supplemental appropriation ordinance (File 101-90-78) which 
appropriated $19,325,716 for various capital improvement 
projects and reserved a total of $5,478,294, pending project 
construction details, the selection of contractors and the 
MBE/WBE status of the contractors. A total of $1,982,208 has 
been subsequently released from reserve leaving a total of 
$3,496,086 still on reserve. If the Board of Supervisors 
approves the request for release of reserved funds, a total of 
$3,138,608 would remain on reserve. 

The request for release of reserved funds would be used to 
complete earthquake damage repairs at San Francisco 
General Hospital. Specifically, these funds would be used as 
follows: 



Construction Contract 

Contingencies 
10 percent of the 
construction contract 

Total 



$324,980 
32.498 

$357,478 



Comments: 1. The proposed $324,980 for contractual services would be 

awarded on a lump-sum basis to Rise Development 
Company, the low-bidder on the proposed contract. Although 
Rise Development Corporation is a minority-owned firm, 
because the firm is located in South San Francisco, it is not 
City-Certified as an MBE firm. The MBE and/or WBE 
subcontractors which Rise Development Company would 
utilize would comprise $142,000 or approximately 44 percent 
of the total contract. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



i n 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



2. According to Mr. Jorge Alfaro of the Department of Public 
Work's (DPW) Bureau of Architecture, the earthquake 
damage repairs at SFGH would begin approximately in mid- 
August, 1992 and be completed by February, 1993. 

Recommendation: Release the reserved funds in the amount of $357,478. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



11 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Item Id - File 94-91-4.4 



Departments: 
Item: 



Grant Amount: 



Source of Funds: 



Description: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Municipal Railway (MUNI) 

Request for release of reserved funds, including $3,035,096 in 
Federal funds and $758,774 in local matching funds for a total 
of $3,793,870 for Municipal Railway Contract No. MR-898, 14 
Mission Line Trolley Overhead Reconstruction - Phase A 
(Persia Avenue to Daly City Loop). 

$3,793,870 

Urban Mass Transit $3,035,096 

Administration (UMTA) 
Section 9 Capital Assistance 

Local Match (See Comment 1) 758.774 

Total $3,793,870 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved a resolution 
(File 94-91-4) authorizing the Public Utilities Commission 
(PUC) to apply for, accept and expend $13,815,120 in Federal 
Urban Mass Transit Administration (UMTA) Section 9 
formula assistance funds (Federal Transit Act (FTA)), and 
apply for, accept and expend $3,453,780 in local matching 
funds for a total of $17,268,900. Of the total $17,268,900, a total 
of $13,982,500 for contractual services was reserved 
($11,186,000 of Federal funds and $2,796,500 of local funds), 
pending the selection of contractors, budgets for the 
contractors, and the contractors' MBE/WBE/LBE status. 

Included in the $13,982,500 on reserve is the sum of $3,793,870 
that was reserved for trolley overhead construction on 
Mission Street. 

The Board of Supervisors subsequently approved a resolution 
(File 61-92-5) granting an extension of time to August 21, 1992 
within which to award Municipal Railway (MUNI) Contract 
No. MR-898, 14 Mission Line Trolley Overhead 
Reconstruction (Phase A - Persia Avenue to Daly City Loop). 

The extension of time was requested because the second 
lowest bidder on the project, Kingston Construction, protested 
the low bid of Abbett Construction Company and Yick Electric 
Company Incorporated, a Joint Venture, on the basis that the 
Joint Venture did not properly implement the Disadvantaged 
Business Enterprise (DBE) Goal of 30 percent. The PUC's 
Contract Compliance Office reviewed the complaint and 
found that the protest was without merit. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



1 ? 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



Comments: 



Since the proposed contract is primarily funded with FTA 
funds, the City's MBE/WBE/LBE preferences are not 
applicable. Instead, only the Federal government's DBE Goal 
(which incorporates both MBE and WBE representation in 
the proposed contract) is applicable. The PUC's Contract 
Compliance Office, which works closely with the Human 
Rights Commission, has certified that Abbett Construction 
Company and Yick Electric Company Incorporated is a Joint 
Venture which has met the applicable DBE and Affirmative 
Action Requirements. The PUC will award the contract to 
Abbett Construction Company and Yick Electric Company 
Incorporated on August 11, 1992. 

The PUC now requests a release of the $3,793,870 for MUNI 
Contract MR-898 for Phase A of the Trolley Overhead 
Reconstruction for the 14 Mission bus line. The PUC advises 
that the remaining $763,647 (for a total contract cost of 
$4,557,517) is to be provided by a previously awarded UMTA 
Section 9 grant and local matching funds (File 94-89-4). 

1. Ms. Marianne Malveaux of PUC's Finance Bureau 
advises that the source of the $758,774 in local matching 
funds under this request for the release of the reserved funds 
of $3,793,870, is as follows: 

State Transportation Planning and Development 

(TP&D) Grant $379,387 

Hetch Hetchy Funds 200,000 

San Francisco Municipal Railway 

Improvement Corporation (SFMRIC) 179.387 

Total match $758,774 

2. The budget for the proposed project is attached. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF S UPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



13 



Attachment 



W rJ t 

a 2 x 
=> < 

O CO 

a: 
hi 
a, 

HON 

2 a fe 

sy o " 

a: 2 x 

a: H 

3 < 
o CO 

a: 

Hi 

a. 



-!i-o. 

<2Q1U 

2 a 2 a 

H- a H 3 
13 < CO 
O CO 

o: 

LU 

a. 



Q O 

LU Q 

OP 

°- ^ 
o < 

or co 
Q. or 

LU 
Q. 



oooooooooooo 



OOOC0OOOOf--OOO 

ooor--ooooTrooo 



OOOOCDOOO 



O r^ 

CM" in" O" Tf" 

io N n s 

CO CM CD 



ooocooooocoooo 



O O i- 



ooonoooor-ooo 

OOON-OOOO^-OOO 

© o o •<-_ o o_ o o_ in o_ o_ o 
cm" in" o" tj-" o" in" co" o" r*-" in" s-" o" 

iDtNins'-tNcocNin'-'-co 

CO CM CO lO f 



r— 
LU 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o_ 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


D 


id" 


o 


o 


o 


o 


in" 


CO 


o 


o" 


in 


(«>r 


o" 


ID 


OO 


CD 


co 


LO 




C\l 


CO 


CM 


o 






CO 


CD 




in 


CM 


co 










ID 






^r 



■c 




c 


O) 


10 — 




c: 




</) CD 




TO 


c 


CD o 




o 




d) CD 




2 

u 

CD 
O 

£ 




</> ro 






_i 




o 

c 


CD 

c 

c 
LU 


C i- 

* ° 

uj O 

M c 

o o 


0- 


o 

(/> 

c 
o 
O 


< 

o 

t- 



"5 .£ = 



O II) CD CD O .h onQ^ 

CD .E </5 = . ' ^ CD "> i_ r>> -^ 

t;cooooD-~oCLh-ro 
CLLUOOZZQOOQCCQ 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Item le - File 94-92-1.1 



Amount: 



Source of Funds: 



Description: 



Department: Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Municipal Railway (MUNI) 
Department of Parking and Traffic 

Item: Release of reserved funds in an amount totalling $159,060, of 

which $97,560 is to be transferred to the Department of 
Parking and Traffic to upgrade signal controllers and 
pedestrian warning devices and $61,500 is for the City's 
Purchaser to issue requisition orders for monitoring and test 
equipment and sensors and interface boxes. 

$159,060 

Federal Highway Administration Funds (FHWA) 
administered through the State Department of 
Transportation Traffic Systems Management funds. 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved legislation 
authorizing the PUC to apply for, accept and expend a new 
State grant in the amount of $437,000 (File 94-92-1). At the 
same time, the Board of Supervisors placed $335,000, 
earmarked for contractual services, on reserve pending 
determination of MBE/WBE status of contractors and 
contract cost details. The grant funds are to be used to 
purchase and install MUNI traffic signal preemption 
equipment at various intersections along Mission Street and 
Ocean Avenue. 

Comments: The PUC is now requesting that $159,060 of the $335,000, 

which was placed on reserve, be released. The PUC advises 
that the installation and upgrading of the traffic signals will 
be performed in-house by the Department of Parking and 
Traffic. As such, the PUC is proposing to transfer $97,560 of 
the requested $159,060 in reserve funds to the Department of 
Parking and Traffic for this purpose. The remaining balance 
of $61,500 would be transferred to the Purchaser for the 
purchase of monitoring and test equipment, and interface 
boxes and sensors (mechanisms which control traffic signal 
light changes in response to MUNI trolley coaches 
movement). 

The Department of Parking and Traffic's estimated 
expenditures for the work to be performed, are as follows: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



IS 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



Traffic Engineering Division 

Engineering Services during Planning, 

Design and Construction Phases $25,000 

Si gnal Division 

Installation of 12 Traffic Signal Controllers @ 

$4,000 each. 48,000 

Installation of 24 Pedestrian Signals @ $645 

each. 15,480 

Upgrade of Eight(8) Existing Pedestrian 
Signals @ $510 each. 4,080 

Contractor 

Install Foundation, Pull Box and Conduit 3.000 

Subtotal $95,560 

The Purchaser would be responsible for 
issuing requisitions for the purchase of the 
following equipment: 

Interface Boxes (36 @ $1,100 each) $39,600 

Sensors (36 @ $305 each) 10,980 

Monitoring and Test Equipment 12.000 

Subtotal $62.580 

Grand Total $158,140 

1. Mr. Javad Micabdal of the Parking and Traffic Department 
reports that the contractor services budgeted for $3,000 would 
be performed by one of three construction contractors who 
have on-going annual contracts with the Parking and Traffic 
Department. 

2. As noted above, the Department of Parking and Traffic's 
actual estimated total expenditures for the installation and 
upgrading of the traffic signals is $95,560 or $2,000 less than 
the $97,560 requested and the equipment is $62,580 or $1,080 
more than the estimated $61,500, for a total of $158,140. 
Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends that $158,140 of 
the total requested $159,060 be released from reserve and the 
remaining balance of $920 continue to be reserved. 

Release $158,140 of the $159,060 from reserve. Continue to 
reserve $920. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



16 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Item If - File 148-91-1.2 



Department: 
Item: 

Amount: 



Department of Public Works (DPW) 
Bureau of Engineering 

Release of reserve for roadway work on City streets in 
accordance with the State-Local Transportation Partnership 
Program (2nd Cycle). 

$858,854 



Source of Funds: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 

Description: The Board of Supervisors previously authorized the DPW to 

expend up to $1,641,494 granted under the State-Local 
Transportation Partnership Program to fund the second year 
or cycle of the ten-year life of the Program (File 148-91-1.1) to 
fund various street reconstruction projects. These grant funds 
are made available for various local transportation street 
improvement projects under SB 400. In addition to the 
$1,641,494 of State grant funds, $3,826,507 in local monies from 
the Half-cent Sales Tax and the 1987 Street Improvement Bond 
Funds have been appropriated by the City for these projects as 
the required local match. In January of 1992, the Board of 
Supervisors placed $1,374,015 of the $1,641,494 State funds on 
reserve pending selection of contractors, including 
identification of the MBE/WBE/LBE status of the contractors 
and finalized contact cost details. This item is a request to 
release $858,854 of the $1,641,494 placed on reserve. The 
attached table is the breakout of the total project costs by 
project and the contractors selected. The Department is 
requesting a release of the State funds which total $858,854. 

Comments: 1. Mr. Joe Ovadia of the Department of Public Works reports 

that all of the total costs include a ten percent allowance for 
contingencies and a ten percent allowance for DPW 
Construction Management costs associated with inspecting 
the projects before completion. 

2. As noted in the attached table, the following three of the 
contractors selected are City certified MBEs: Inter-Coastal, a 
Joint Venture, Stacy & Witbeck, and Esquivel and Esquivel 
Grading & Paving, Inc. The table also shows the locations of 
these street reconstruction projects. 

Recommendation: Release the requested $858,854. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



17 































































u 






























CO 
















































> 


















3 






























'3 
















































cr 


















> 




















6 

c 










LU 






















o 


















o 








TJ 




CO 


TJ 


o 














o 


















CO 


















o 










O 


m 


d 
















o 


ai 








re 


CO 


r^ 




n 














r^ 


















CO 












CO 


O 














LU 


C7> 
















a] 


i^ 










LU 


CO 


CO 
00 


c 
o 
O 










o 
O 


CO 


CD 
CD 

69 
















o 
C3 


co" 

CO 
CM 








ja 

i 


re 

55 


m 
5 


CO 

cn 

CO 
69 






o 




O 


o 


o 




o 


O 




in 




CO 




o 




CO 


CO 




i^- 


CM 











o 




o 


o 


o 




o 


CO 




CM 




CD 




to 




h- 


p 




i^- 













in 




d 


d 


d 




d 


0) 




d 




cn 




■«r 




r^ 


^ 




CM 


CO 




CO 






Ol 




r-- 




o 




CO 


CO 




CO 




CO 




CO 




CM 


CO 




O 


O) 




r^ 






CO 




o> 




t 






N-_ 




°i 




T 




CO 




CM 


CO 




^r 


^r_ 




cn 






|C 




o» 




CO* 




CO" 


CD 




TT 




d 




co" 




co" 


m 




r-" 






co" 






CO 




CO 


CO 


CO 




CO 


CO 




en 




CO 




CO 




CO 


cn 






CM 




CO 






ID 




CO 


1^- 


K 




r- 






CM 




CO 




CO 




CO 


CO 




r^ 


r-- 




h- 






69 




69 


69 


69 

6 

c 
c 
o 

3 




69 


W 




69 




60 




iff 




<y> 


v> 




69 


6» 




69 




















































c 
















































3 










c 










d 




























O 










o 










_c 


















_C 










E 
< 










o 


















c 
























2 


d 


CO 










a> 




CO 










.> 




cij 


CD 








^ 






3 






> 






c 




3 




cn 




> 


3 






3 












c 


— 


_l 




-j 






TJ 




c 




c 




—J 


CT 




TJ 


C 








in 






CD 
> 


c 
o 


c 
co 




o" 

c 
re 

re 

Z 

< 






re 
(5 




CO 

> 




"> 

« 

Q_ 




o" 

c 
re 

re 
< 


LU 
TJ 




re 

<5 


! 








TJ 
TJ 

b 


C 

wi 
O 




c 
o 

-3 

a 


o 

3 
C 


tj 
c 
re 
>. 

c 

re 




ci 

_c 

o 




cn 
c 
"> 

a. 




c 

o 

~3 

re 
re 




cn 

c 

TJ 

re 




C 

re 
o 

CO 
J3 




08 

CI) 

c 
"> 

re 

0- 




~3 

re 
"5 




6 









o) UJ v- 


I 


LJJ 


re Hi 










UJ 


a 


LU 


re Ul 


i 


UJ 






lLT 






m 




re m o 


cd 


LTD 


m co 


CD 








re 


CD 




CD 


CO CO 


CO 


a> 


re 


CQ 


CD 










O _1 •= 

o r> £ 

i w P L 


_J 


45 "J 










o 


_l 




_) 


2 co 


=8 
>. 

o 

re 

55 


_l 







_l 








o 




D < 
i Q 


111 
CD 


o 









O 


UJ 
CD 


'5 
cr 


UJ 
CD 


UJ 

CD 


6 


O 


UJ 

ca 


5 







C3 




5= S £ 

JH fc CO =: 


5 








re 
CO 




c. 


5 


UJ 


5 


° 5 


2 


CO 


c 


2 









■ 




■ 


■ 


■ 




■ 


■ 




■ 




m 




■ 




■ 


■ 




■ 


■ 




■ 
































































o 


















CO 












CM 


re 
o 
o 
















CO 


















CO 














o 














1^ 
co" 


















CM 

cm" 












CO 


_1 


re 

5 














CO 


















CM 
CM 












CO 
CO 
















69 


















69 












69 


cn 














































TJ 
















































c 

U_ 


6? 

CM 

o 
o 














CO 
N 

CM 


















CO 
TT 
CO 

uf 
a 












1^ 


3 


C 














CM 
69 




























CM 
69 


<s> 
















































£ 














1^ 






























CO 


















CD 






























CM 


















O) 


















CD 












CO 


s 


o 
O 














co" 

CO 


















r~T 












co" 

CO 


UJ 
















1^ 
69 


















CO 












r~ 






































o 






















































































































































































CO 










CO 


































13 












































CO 




> 




< 










£ 


~u> 




























JZ 




CD 




TJ 










CO 












<Q 


















■c 








C 




55 








X 




























o 








re 






















1 




CO 














I 




Cd 




JZ 

cn 




> 






co 


c 

CO 




^7 






_1 
T5 

'o 
a 


a> 
55 

>. 
o 


E 

10 
DC 

CO 


co 
"co 
re 










CO 

c 


o 

CO 

o 

55 

c 
o 


CO 


< 

o 
< 


tn 

c 
o 
cn 
_c 
"c 
c 

CO 

CO 


I 
o 

> 
< 
a 

c 
cn 

UJ 


cv5 


o 

TJ 

o 

CO 

c 




55 


JZ 
LO 

a 

55 
c 
o 

5 


., and South 
24th St.) 
sSt. 


55 

-CZ 

£ 


CO 








3 

o 

> 


CM 


5 

TJ 

C 










o 

O) 

1 


E 

S 
u^ 


C 
o 
5 

UJ 


o 


o 

O 


o 

c 
o> 

< 




o 

re 

X 

a 


18th Si 

Ave. to 

Arkansa 


x: 

CO 






Ul 














UJ 


















UJ 












n 




CD 














r*- 






























o 




CO 












































~* 


6 


(O 
CO 














o 


















o 













18 



















_c 
















c 
























ci> 
















CT) 








































c 
























n 
















> 








































.0 








-,_, 


o 














O 


O 
IT) 














D- 


LU 


m 
o> 




o 


o 














=8 


CO 














°a 


m 


CO 




u 


CO 














c 


<n 














cn 




CM 




0> 
















en 














c 


LU' 


CO 




0) 

cn 


c 
o 
O 














"> 

CO 

0. 

O 
CO 


in 

CO 
CO 














-a 

ro 

> 

cr 

UJ 


CO 

5 


m 
m 






o 




o 




o 


o 




o 


CO 




CO 




in 








cn 








in 




o 




II) 


CO 




q 


CO 




o> 




O) 

















co 








r^ 


CM 






c\i 




CO 




CX) 




«/ 













lO 




t 




r^ 


T 




CO 


CO 




CJ 




CM 




*i 










o> 




o_ 




CO 






o_ 


CD 








in 




<D 










in 








eg" 


co 




*r 


CO 




CO 




r»r 








TT 








CO 




CO 




CO 


CO 




r-~ 


•<* 




ID 




in 




O 




CO 












^r 




t 


■<r 






m 




CO 




in 




in 










10 




ty> 




V} 


t/» 




tr> 


» 




w 




w> 




t-> 
















































-^ 








































^ 








































c 








































3 


















o 






















O 


jz 
















c 








o 














E 
< 


cn 




- 






2 






Ol 








c 








CO 






^ 






cn 
c 






5 
1z 




> 

- > 


c 








cn 
c 




> 




3 
c 






CD 


<s 




"> 






CD 






CO 








> 








CD 






«3 


c5 




Q- 






> 




C 


6 








CO 
0- 




c 

CO 




> 






(rt 


=>3 




ofl 






c 




_* 


«3 








06 






c 






© 

■D 
CD 


en 
c 
"> 

to 
a 




cn 

CZ 

'■a 
ca 




6 

_c 

o 


'o 




2 
< 
>> — . 


cn 
> 

CO 

0- 




6 

c 

o 




CO 

c 
ri 

CO 




CO 

< 






—> 

CO 

"5 












c5 


LU 




CLT 


CO UJ 








O 


LU 


a 


LlT 


u LU 














CQ 


m 


CO 


m 


en m 


.5 




m 






CD 


CD 


CO 


ca CD 












"5 






O 


_i 


■S w 










"© 


_l 


c 

CD 




O _! 








o 
>- 




_> 

Z> 


UJ 
CD 


o 


O 


UJ 

CD 


O 




o 




> 
"3 
cr 


LU 

CO 


LU 
CO 


9 sr 

CD CO 








co 
m 




UJ 


5 




^c 


5 


° 5 


CO 
CO 








LU 


2 


O 
O 


5 


£ S 






^ 




































CO 


— 


S- 
















o 










c^- 










CO 




o 

o 


















!>-" 










m 










ej" 



—I 


















CM 










C\i 











cm" 


l/l 






































c 
_ 


? 
















ia 










IN 












LO 


cj 
















<r 




















CO 


o 






































o 
















r^ 










*T 










co" 


6 
















IN 










CO 










m 


3 


C 
















*» 










V> 










CO 


CO 












































































CO 


© 


















CO 










OJ 










CO 


n 


o 
















CO 

iq 










CO 

eg 










cn 


o» 


o 
O 
















CM 










r>~ 










S 


uj 




























'XI 
















































_j 








































< 








































D- 
























_J 
















O 
























55 
















1- 












(0 
































2 




■6 

> 














q 




CO 




Cn 




















5 












00 




























c 




CO 

c 








> 




CO 





3 












"o 








3 

















2 

















_o_ 




O 




m 
















o 
















'o 




o 




o 




^ 






^ 


^ 






s 

CO 












a 




TJ 








o 






a> 


to 




Q-> 


CO 
















C 




35 


































1 


.c 


CM 




"ST CO "> 
« O C 






CO 

C 


e 


cn 
c 
o 


3 


c 


1 


> 

c 














£ 


g 

2 


SI 


a 

:• 


t "ST 2 
® T= u. 






J5 

3 


| 


5. 

<0 


i 


.0 


g 


















































b 


' 




*- 




> 






11 




o 




c> 














111 
















UJ 




















n 


0> 


-r 
















in 




















o 


T3 

6 


o 
















s 





















Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Item 2 - File 100-92-5 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of July 
29, 1992. 

This is a hearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the revenues 
of the City and County of San Francisco. 

As of the writing of this report, several different proposals by the Governor 
and various portions of the California Legislature exist and no final steps have 
been taken toward final adoption of the 1992-93 State budget. Until such final 
adoption, we are unable to assess the exact impact on the revenues and 
expenditures of the City and County of San Francisco. 



20 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Item 3 - File 47-92-5 

Note: This item was continued from the Finance Committee meeting on July 
29, 1992. 

1. The proposed ordinance would approve and adopt legal documents and 
authorization for a management agreement pertaining to the Polk-Bush Parking 
Garage. 

2. The Polk-Bush Garage is a new City-owned parking facility located at the 
southeast corner of Bush and Polk Streets. The Parking Authority reports that 
the garage is scheduled to be completed by November of 1992. The garage has an 
estimated construction cost of $4,125,000 and is being paid for by previously 
appropriated Off-Street Parking Funds. The new garage will include an annex 
which would be located on Bush Street. The proposed annex is currently a 
metered parking facility which the City leases from the San Francisco Unified 
School District. The Polk-Bush Garage has 132 parking spaces and is projected to 
serve approximately 12,500 vehicles per month. The annex will be converted from 
the existing 38-space metered parking facility to a 30-space monthly parking 
facility. 

Mr. Kevin Hagerty, Director of the Parking Authority reports that the 
Department will submit a request to the Board of Supervisors, prior to October of 
1992, to amend the Traffic Code to delete the annex portion of the parking facility 
from the category of a metered facility. 

3. Under the proposed legal documents, the parking rates to be charged per 
vehicle parked in the new Polk-Bush Garage and annex are as follows: 

Hourly Parking-Daytime Rates (Polk-Bush Garage Only) 



Time 








Parking Charge 


0-1 hour 








$1.00 


1-2 hours 








2.00 


2-3 hours 








3.00 


3-4 hours 








4.00 


4-5 hours 








5.00 


5-6 hours 








6.00 


6-7 hours 








7.00 


Over 7 hours 








8.00 


Hourlv Parking-Nierhttime Rates (Polk-Bush Garaee Onlv) 


6:00 p.m. to 12:0C 


i a.m. - 


$1.00 


per hour 




Maximum Rate - 


$3.00 









BOARD OF SU PERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

91 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



Monthly Parking (Annex Only) 

$80.00 per month (payable on a month-to-month basis only) 

Lost Ticket Charge (Polk-Bush Garage Only) 

The rate for over 7 hours of parking will be charged for each day, or part 
thereof, unless the garage manager can verify that a greater charge is 
appropriate by identifying the lost ticket from the records. 

4. Under the proposed management agreement (after deduction of parking 
tax and payment of rent on annex property), the garage operator would receive a 
monthly management fee (based on the monthly cost to operate the garage) paid 
from the gross parking revenues and would receive five percent of the garage 
gross revenues exceeding $300,000 per year. The balance of revenues would 
accrue to the City's Off-Street Parking Fund. The management agreement 
provides that the monthly management fee would be adjusted annually according 
to the Consumer Price Index. 

Comments 

1. The Parking Authority estimates that the Polk-Bush Garage and annex 
will initially generate gross annual revenues of approximately $250,000 and 
$25,000 respectively, for a total projected gross revenue amount of $275,000 
annually. The Parking Authority estimates that $55,000 of the $275,000 would be 
deducted for parking tax, based on a 25 percent parking tax, leaving a balance of 
$220,000. The Budget Analyst notes that the Board of Supervisors has recently 
approved a reduction in the City's parking tax from 25 percent to 20 percent, 
effective January 1, 1993. Of the remaining $220,000, the Parking Authority 
estimates that $12,000 would be paid to the Unified School District for rental of the 
annex property, $180,000 to $204,000 representing 82 to 93 percent of gross 
revenues (after deduction of parking tax) would be paid to the garage operator in 
the form of a management fee, and a balance of $4,000 to $28,000 would accrue to 
the City's Off-Street Parking Fund. 

2. Mr. Hagerty reports that the estimated $180,000 to $204,000 to be paid to 
the garage operator is based on the Parking Authority's projected cost to operate 
the garage and annex, as follows: 

Parking Attendant 

Monday - Saturday from 9:30 a.m. to 12 midnight 

(14.5 hours @ $20.00/hour x 313 days) $90,770 

Sunday from 11:00 a.m. to 12 midnight 

(13 hours @ $20.00/hour x 52 days) 13,520 

Security Guard 

Monday - Sunday from 5:00 p.m. to 12 midnight 

(7 hours @ $12.00 x 365 days) 30,660 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

22 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Utilities and Maintenance 

$3,750 per month x 12 months $45.000 

Total $179,950 

3. Mr. Hagerty advises that the Parking Authority is proposing to operate 
the Polk-Bush Garage under a management agreement as opposed to a lease 
agreement in order to hold open the option of refinancing the garage with 
government bonds at a future date. Mr. Hagerty reports that a change in the 
Federal Tax law in 1986 excludes the use of tax free government bonds to finance 
facilities that are leased on a percentage of gross receipts basis. Mr. Hagerty 
states that refinancing the Polk-Bush Garage with bond funds, would result in 
the Off-Street Parking Funds which were initially used to construct this facility 
being made available for future purchases of property or the construction of 
facilities, if needed. According to Mr. Hagerty, this refinancing option is 
necessary because the Parking Authority has two supplemental appropriations 
pending in the Mayor's Office, totalling approximately $1.5 million, which would 
deplete the current balance of approximately $1.5 million in the Off-Street Parking 
Fund. Mr. Hagerty adds that once the garage has been refinanced, the 
management agreement would have to remain in effect for the term of the bonds 
(approximately 24 years). 

4. As noted above, under the proposed management agreement the garage 
operator would be paid a management fee based on the cost to operate the garage. 
According to Mr. Hagerty, the amount paid to the garage operator under a lease 
agreement would be basically the same as the amount paid under the proposed 
management agreement because under a lease agreement the garage operator 
would be paid a percentage of the gross revenue, which would be based on the cost 
to operate the garage. 

5. Mr. Hagerty advises that the metered parking facility which is to be 
converted into the annex generated $12,235 in revenues for 1991-92. Mr. Hagerty 
reports that the conversion of the parking facility into an annex is estimated to 
cost approximately $40,000, which would be paid for by previously appropriated 
Off-Street Parking Funds. According to Mr. Hagerty, the merchants in the 
immediate vicinity of the proposed annex, strongly support the conversion of the 
existing metered parking facility into a monthly parking facility because loitering, 
vandalism and other negative street activities are currently taking place at the 
existing facility. A monthly rental parking facility would eliminate transient 
parking on a daily basis, which is viewed as a contributing factor to the negative 
street activities. 

6. The proposed legislation only approves the legal documents and 
management agreement as to form and authorizes the Director of Property to seek 
competitive bids for the management of the Polk-Bush Garage and annex. The 
actual award of a management agreement will be subject to subsequent 
legislation to be adopted by the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

7. The Budget Analyst notes that the City expended approximately 
$4,493,000 of Off-Street Parking Funds to design ($368,000) and construct 
($4,125,000) the Polk-Bush Garage. In addition, the Department of Parking and 
Traffic estimates that it will cost approximately $40,000 to convert the annex from 
a metered parking facility to a monthly parking facility. In return, the 
Department projects that $55,000 would be paid to the City based on 25 percent 
parking taxes, $12,000 per year would be paid to the Unified School District for 
rental of the annex property and $180,000 to $204,000 would be paid to the garage 
operator annually. This results in a balance of only $4,000 to $28,000 accruing to 
the City's Off-Street Parking Fund. As the Budget Analyst has previously noted, 
the Board of Supervisors recently approved a reduction in the parking taxes from 
25 percent to 20 percent, effective January 1, 1993, such that the City would only 
receive approximately $46,000 in annual parking taxes, or $9,000 less than the 
projected $55,000 in annual parking taxes. Furthermore, if the Polk-Bush Garage 
does not generate the projected gross revenues of $275,000, the parking taxes to the 
City will decline further and there is a potential for either garage services being 
reduced (permissible under the management agreement) or the Parking 
Authority having to use Off-Street Parking Funds to subsidize the garage 
operations. Given the proposed financial arrangements, and the fact that 
approval of this legislation would result in the approval of new parking rates, the 
Budget Analyst believes approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 

Rwnrtim^^timi 

Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for the Board of 
Supervisors. 



BOARD OF ST JPERVLSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

24 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Item 4 -File 31-92-3 

Department: Fire Department 



Item: 

Description- 
Retirement Date: 



Resolution approving the immediate filling of a vacant 
position 

0140 Chief, Fire Department 

July 20, 1992 



Normal Refill Date: January 13, 1993 
Funding Needed: $61,339 



Proposed Funding 
Source: 

Description: 



Comments: 



Permanent Salaries - Uniform 

Section 10, Subsection 1 of the Annual Appropriation 
Ordinance permits immediate filling of a position left 
vacant due to retirement of an incumbent when a lump 
sum payment is made for accumulated leave. The 
immediate filling of a vacant position requires a request by 
the department's appointing officer, the approval of the 
department head, the recommendation of the General 
Manager, Personnel, and the Mayor and approval by 
ordinance or resolution of the Board of Supervisors. 

1. The Chief of the Fire Department retired on July 20, 1992 
and was paid for 1,011 hours of vested sick leave and 
vacation at an hourly rate of $60.67 for a total lump sum 
payment of $61,339. The payment of this lump sum prevents 
refilling this position until January 13, 1993, unless the 
proposed resolution is approved. Immediate replacement of 
the Chief of the Fire Department is necessary to maintain 
continuity of all Fire Department operations. 

2. The new Chief of the Fire Department was appointed by 
the Fire Commission effective July 21, 1992. 

3. Each year the Fire Department assumes that 50 Uniform 
positions in command and fire suppression activities will 
retire. In order to provide the resources to maintain full 
staffing of command and fire suppression activities, the 
Fire Department increases their salaries budget by an 
amount equal to the total of the average amount of lump 
sum sick leave/vacation pay that will be paid to the 50 
retirees. This funding is then used as a source of funds to 
refill the Uniform positions in order to maintain full 
staffing for command and fire suppression activities. The 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



25 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



budget for refilling the 50 positions is the proposed source of 
funds for the immediate filling of the Chief of the Fire 
Department position. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

26 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Item 5 -File 31.-92-4 

Department Fire Department 



Item: 

Description: 
Retirement Date: 



Resolution approving the immediate filling of a vacant 
position 

0150 Deputy Chief, Fire Department 

July 3, 1992 



Normal Refill Date: January 1, 1993 
Funding Needed: $52,360 



Proposed Funding 
Source: 

Description: 



Comments: 



Permanent Salaries - Uniform 

Section 10, Subsection 1 of the Annual Appropriation 
Ordinance permits immediate filling of a position left 
vacant due to retirement of an incumbent when a lump 
sum payment is made for accumulated leave. The 
immediate filling of a vacant position requires a request by 
the department's appointing officer, the approval of the 
department head, the recommendation of the General 
Manager, Personnel, and the Mayor and approval by 
ordinance or resolution of the Board of Supervisors. 

1. The Deputy Chief of the Fire Department retired on July 
3, 1992 and was paid for 1,025 hours of vested sick leave and 
vacation at an hourly rate of $51.08 for a total lump sum 
payment of $52,360. The payment of this lump sum prevents 
refilling this position until January 1, 1993, unless the 
proposed resolution is approved. The Deputy Chief serves as 
the Acting Chief in the Chiefs absence. The regular duties 
of the Deputy Chief include administration of the Fire 
Department Bureaus of Suppression, Fire Prevention, Fire 
Investigation and Training. 

2. The new Deputy Chief was appointed by the new Chief of 
the Fire Department (see Item 4 of this report) effective July 
21, 1992. 

3. Each year the Fire Department assumes that 50 Uniform 
positions in command and fire suppression activities will 
retire. In order to provide the resources to maintain full 
staffing of command and fire suppression activities, the 
Fire Department increases their salaries budget by an 
amount equal to the total of the average amount of lump 
sum sick leave/vacation pay that will be paid to the 50 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



27 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



retirees. This funding is then used as a source of funds to 
refill the Uniform positions in order to maintain full 
staffing for command and fire suppression activities. The 
budget for refilling the 50 positions is the proposed source of 
funds for the immediate filling of the Deputy Chief position. 



Recommendation; Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Item 6 -File 68-92-4.1 

Department: Mayor's Office Housing (MOH) 

Item: Resolution approving procedures for allocating up to 

$8,206,000 in Federal HOME Program grant funds from the 
U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 
and authorizing the Mayor to encumber and authorize 
release of these grant funds from HUD. (HUD will release 
funds directly to program recipients designated by MOH in 
its role as administrator of the grant program.) Direct and 
indirect costs associated with the grant will be paid by 
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds. 

Amount: Not to exceed $8,206,000 

Description: The HUD HOME Program is authorized under Title II of the 

National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 (Public Law 
Number 101-625), which provides funds for the acquisition, 
rehabilitation and development of affordable housing. In 
March, 1992, the Board of Supervisors authorized MOH to 
apply for, accept and administer a HUD HOME Program 
grant of up to $8,206,000. HOME Program grant funds will 
generally be used to make long term (75 years), low interest 
(3 percent) loans to developers of housing for low income 
families. HOME Program grant funds can also be loaned at 
zero interest for 20 years to developers that will match the 
HOME Program grant funds on a dollar-for-dollar basis. 
Loans are available to either for-profit or non-profit 
developers. 

The $8,206,000 HOME Program grant is one component of 
the Citywide housing investment plan that includes funding 
from several other sources of development monies including 
CDBG funds, the housing set-aside under the Hotel Tax 
Fund, any available funds from tax increment financing, 
the Office-Affordable Housing Production Program, and 
other special funds targeted for affordable housing. The 
Citywide housing investment plan encourages the 
development of affordable housing in a manner consistent 
with the priorities set forth in the City's Comprehensive 
Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) and with the goals of 
the Residence Element of the Master Plan adopted by the 
City's Planning Commission. The HOME Program grant 
funds of $8,206,000 would be expended as follows: 

1) Approximately $2 million (24.4 percent) would be set 
aside for new construction of single room occupancy 
hotels and other forms of group housing; 



BOARD OF SU PERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



2) Approximately $2.2 million (26.8 percent) would be used 
for acquisition and rehabilitation of non-profit owned 
rental housing. There would be an emphasis on 
multiple-bedroom housing for very low and extremely 
low income households; 

3) Approximately $1 million (12.2 percent) would finance 
the rehabilitation of private investor-owned rental 
housing, primarily multi-unit, multiple bedroom 
housing; 

4) Approximately $1 million (12.2 percent) would be made 
available to rehabilitate both non-profit and for-profit 
owned group housing, including single room 
occupancy hotels and board and care facilities; 

5) Approximately $2 million (24.4 percent) would 
constitute a pool of funds set aside for contingencies and 
for housing investment opportunities which are 
unforeseeable at the present time. 

In previously authorizing the MOH to apply for, accept and 
administer the $8,206,000 HOME Program grant, the Board 
of Supervisors directed the MOH to prepare and submit 
allocation criteria and procedures to be used for allocating 
HOME Program grant funds to the Board of Supervisors for 
approval prior to the encumbrance of HOME Program grant 
funds by the MOH. The proposed resolution would approve 
the Procedures for Allocating Home Program Funds. The 
written procedures are contained in the Board of Supervisors 
file for this item. These procedures were prepared and 
submitted by the MOH in order to obtain approval from the 
Board of Supervisors to encumber HOME Program grant 
funds. The procedures are summarized as follows: 

• The stated purpose of the written Procedures for 
Allocating Home Program Funds is to establish uniform 
criteria and processes for implementation of the City's 
program to allocate HOME Program grant funds and to 
describe the responsibilities of agencies and individuals 
involved in the administration of the City's program. 

• The Mayor's Office of Housing and the San Francisco 
Redevelopment Agency (SFRA), Housing Production 
Division shall jointly administer the City's program to 
allocate the HOME Program grant funds. 

• By March 30th of each year, an Annual Report shall be 
submitted to the Board of Supervisors, setting forth an 
accounting of all the HOME Program grant funds 

BOARD OF ST JPERVTSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



30 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



allocated by the City during the previous calendar year. 
The report shall identify how HOME Program grant 
funds were distributed among the different categories of 
housing needs identified in the City's housing strategy 
and describe the number, location, unit-mix, and non- 
City funds leveraged for each project funded for the 
period. 

The Mayor, in consultation with the Director of MOH 
and the Director of SFRA shall allocate HOME Program 
grant funds along with other locally administered funds 
based on the categories of housing development and 
specific target populations identified by the 
Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) 
as the City's priority affordable housing needs. The 
allocation of funds shall be governed by the priorities for 
investment set out in the City's CHAS and by the goals of 
the Residence Element of the Master Plan. In allocating 
funds, the MOH shall take into account the use 
restrictions associated with each funding source, such 
as those limiting use of Hotel Tax funds to development 
of housing for seniors, and the varying potential for 
leveraging non-City monies associated with each 
funding source. 

The MOH shall authorize commitment of HOME 
Program grant funds to specific projects upon 
recommendation of the Affordable Housing Development 
Loan Committee consisting of the Director of MOH, the 
Director of SFRA, and the Director of the Mayor's Office 
of Economic Planning and Development (MOEPD). The 
Loan Committee shall review and recommend approval 
or denial of all applications for loans. 

Specific criteria for evaluation of HOME Program grant 
funded project applications are contained in Subsection 
D of Section II of the written procedures. 

All units assisted with HOME Program grant funds 
shall be occupied by households with incomes that do not 
exceed sixty percent (60%) of median income for the Bay 
Area adjusted for family size. (According to the HUD 
Income Limits table in the CHAS, the median income 
for a family of four is $49,900. Therefore, the income of a 
family with four members that occupies a unit assisted 
with HOME Program grant funds cannot exceed 60 
percent of $49,900, or $29,940.) 

The total charge for rent, utilities and related services 
charged by the developers for rental units funded by 

BOARD OF SUPERVLSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



\] 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 



Comments: 



HOME Program grant funds cannot exceed thirty 
percent (30%) of a family's income. (In the previous 
example for a family of four, the total charge for rent, 
utilities and related services cannot exceed 30 percent of 
$29,940, or $8,982 annually or $748.50 monthly.) 

• The affordability restrictions regarding (1) income of 
occupants of rental units developed with loans of HOME 
Program grant funds and (2) total charge for rent, 
utilities and related services must remain in effect for 
the term of the loan (either 75 years or 20 years). 

• The Director of MOH shall determine how much interest 
shall be charged on the 75 year loans funded by HOME 
Program grant funds. These loans may be interest 
bearing or interest free, depending on the financial 
feasibility of the project. The Director of MOH shall also 
determine the terms under which interest and/or 
principal shall be paid by a developer. Payment may be 
amortized or deferred to the end of the term of the loan. 
Deferred loans may be structured so as to require 
payment at the end of the term, or to be forgiven. 

1. The MOH expects to incur minimal indirect costs for 
services of the Controller's Office and for the monitoring of 
these grant funds. MOH anticipates that these indirect costs 
will be minimal because once the MOH has identified the 
specific housing projects to receive HOME Program grant 
funds, the grant monies will be disbursed by HUD directly to 
the projects. Such indirect costs will be paid from CDBG 
funds. 



2. The written procedures for allocating the HOME 
Program grant funds allow the Director of MOH sole 
discretion in determining if interest is to be paid on the 75 
year loans, the rate of interest to be paid and the terms for 
payment of interest and principal. The Director of MOH is 
also allowed the discretion to determine that payments can 
be amortized or deferred to the end of the loan or can be 
forgiven altogether. Because of the delegation of such 
discretion, we believe that approval of the proposed 
resolution is a policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



32 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 5, 1992 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution is a policy matter for the 
Board of Supervisors. 







Harvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Gonzalez 
Supervisor Migden 
Supervisor Hallinan 
President Shelley 
Supervisor Achtenberg 
Supervisor Alioto 
Supervisor Britt 
Supervisor Conroy 
Supervisor Hsieh 
Supervisor Kennedy 
Supervisor Maher 
Clerk of the Board 
Chief Administrative Officer 
Controller 
Kent Sims 
Jean Mariani 
Barbara Kolesar 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF ST JPERVLSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

33 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
CALENDAR AUG 1 1992 

.A MEETING OF pSbuc^bTar? 

FINANCE COMMITTEE ruuuo LIBRARY 

-BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1992 - 2:00 P.M. ROOM 228, CITY HALL 

MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS GONZALEZ, MIGDEN, HALLINAN 

CLERK: GAIL JOHNSON 

NOTE: Copies of the Budget Analyst's Report will be available for review on the 

counter in the Office of the Clerk of the Board, Room 235, City Hall, 
10:00 a.m., the date of the meeting. 



CONSENT CALENDAR 

All matters listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are considered to be 
routine by the Finance Committee, and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote 
of the Committee. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a 
member of the Committee or a member of the public so requests, in which event the 
matter shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a separate 
item. 

(a) File 38-92-21 . [Acceptance of Gift] Resolution accepting one gift valued at 
$23,889, from the Northern California Grant Makers, for use at various 
recreation centers, after-school, latch-key, day camp and teen programs for 
the Recreation and Park Department. (Recreation and Park Department) 

(b) File 132-92-6 . [Grant - Foundation Funds] Resolution authorizing the San 
Francisco Art Commission to permit Intersection for the Arts to continue to 
act as non-profit fiscal agent for the San Francisco Art Commission Gallery 
and to continue sponsorship of the Gallery's Exploration: City Site Program 
and in that capacity to apply for, accept and expend a $7,500 George Frederick 
Jewett Foundation grant for City Site Programming; indirect costs of ten 
percent fiscal agent fee in the amount of $750.00 will be paid to Intersection 
for the Arts from the grant. (Art Commission) 

(c) File 146-92-4.2 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the 
Department of Public Health, Bureau of Epidemiology and Disease Control, 
Tuberculosis Control Division, to apply for, retroactively, and accept and 
expend a supplemental to a grant of $268,923, which includes indirect costs in 
the amount of $21,761 based on twenty percent of salaries, from the 
Department of Health and Human Services for the Tuberculosis Control 
Project; providing for ratification of action previously taken; companion 
measure to Files 146-92-4 and 146-92-4.1. (Department of Public Health) 



(d) File 146-92-18.1 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the 
Department of Public Health, Division of Mental Health and Substance Abuse, 
to accept and expend a grant of $25,000, which includes indirect costs in the 
amount of $1,190, based on five percent of the total award from the California 
Department of Developmental Services for mental health treatment for dually 
diagnosed Asian Children; companion measure to File 146-92-18. (Department 
of Public Health) 

(e) File 146-92-33.1 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the 
Department of Public Health, Community Public Health Services, 
Epidemiology and Disease Control, Sexually Transmitted Disease Control, to 
apply for, accept and expend a grant of $700,468, which includes indirect costs 
in the amount of $7,798 based on twenty percent of salaries, from the Centers 
for Disease Control, for a research study to evaluate HPV counseling models; 
companion measure to File 146-92-33. (Department of Public Health) 

(f) File 146-92-34.1 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the 
Department of Public Health, Community Public Health Services, 
Epidemiology and Disease Control, Sexually Transmitted Disease Control 
Division, to accept and expend a grant of $378,916, which includes indirect 
costs of $27,766 based on twenty percent of personnel salaries from the 
Centers for Disease Control, for the provision of alternative Sexually 
Transmitted Disease services; companion measure to File 146-92-34. 
(Department of Public Health) 

(g) File 146-92-55 . [Grant - State Funds] Resolution authorizing the Department 
of Public Health, Laguna Honda Hospital, to accept and expend a Hazard 
Mitigation grant of $215,000, and a required match in the amount of $215,000, 
which is one hundred percent of the total award, from the California State 
Office of Emergency Services in behalf of Federal Emergency Management 
Agency (FEMA) for construction costs; waiving indirect costs; companion 
measure to File 133-90-1. (Department of Public Health) 

(h) File 146-92-56 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the 
Department of Public Health, AIDS Office, to accept and expend an 
augmentation grant of $66,547, which includes $8,564 in indirect costs based on 
twenty percent of personnel costs, from the Department of Health and Human 
Services, Centers for Disease Control, to continue funding the AIDS 
Surveillance and Expanded Initiatives Project. (Department of Public Health) 



(i) File 146-92-57 . [Grant - Federal Funds] Resolution authorizing the 

Department of Public Health, AIDS Office, to apply for a continuation grant of 
$6,250,000, which includes indirect costs based on twenty percent of personnel 
costs, from the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for 
Disease Control, to continue funding the AIDS Prevention Project. 
(Department of Public Health). 

ACTION: 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

2. File 100-92-5 . Fearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the revenue 
of the City and County of San Francisco. (Supervisor Migden) 

(Continued from 8/5/92) 

ACTION: 

3. File 25-92-22 . [Contracting Out City Services - Police Department] Resolution 
concurring with the Controller's certification that janitorial services can be 
practically performed for San Francisco Police Department facilities by private 
contractor for lower cost than similar work services performed by City and County 
employees. (Police Department) 

(Cont'd from 7/29/92) 

ACTION: 

4. File 97-92-42 . [Emergency Medical Services Fund] Ordinance amending 
Administrative Code, by amending Section 10.117-73, to require that the Emergency 
Medical Services Fund be continued using penalty revenues pursuant to Government 
Code Sections 76000 and 76104, to require that the moneys in such fund be payable 
only for the purposes specified in Government Code Section 76104, and to make 
changes pursuant to recent amendments to Health and Safety Code Sections 
1797.98a through 1797. 98g. (Municipal Court) 

(Cont'd from 7/29/92) 

ACTION: 

5. File 97-92-43 . [Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund] Ordinance amending 
Administrative Code, by amending Section 10.117-108, to establish the Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 76102, to 
require that the moneys in such fund be payable only for the purposes set forth in 
Government Code Section 76102, and to renumber Charter Section 6.311 to 6.306. 
(Municipal Court) 

(Cont'd from 7/29/92) 

ACTION: 

6. File 97-92-43.1 . [Disbursement of the additional penalties] Resolution providing for 
the disbursement of the additional penalties assessed in criminal cases pursuant to 
Government Code Section 76000, establishing a Courthouse Construction Fund 
pursuant to Government Code Section 76100, establishing an Automated Fingerprint 
Identification Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 76102, continuing an 
Emergency Medical Services Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 76104, and 
imposing an additional penalty on all parking offenses to support the Courthouse 
Construction Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 76000; companion measure 
to File Nos. 97-92-42, 97-92-43 and 97-92-44. (Municipal Court) 

(Cont'd from 7/29/92) 

ACTION: 



7. File 97-92-44 . [Courthouse Construction Fund] Ordinance amending Administrative 
Code, by amending Section 10.117-35, to rename the "Courthouse Temporary 
Construction Fund" the "Courthouse Construction Fund", to require that surcharges 
on filing fees in the Municipal and Superior Courts and penalty assessments provided 
in Government Code Section 76000 be deposited in such fund, and to require that the 
moneys deposited in such fund be used only for the purposes set forth in Government 
Code Sections 76000, 76100 and 76238. (Municipal Court) 

(Cont'd from 7/29/92) 

ACTION: 

8. File 97-92-44.1 . [Courthouse Construction Fund] Resolution renaming the 
Courthouse Construction Fund and continuing the surcharge on filing fees in Civil 
and Probate actions in the Superior Court and in civil actions in the Municipal Court 
as provided in Government Code Section 76238 and Section 10.117-35 of the San 
Francisco Administrative Code, to assist in the acquisition, rehabilitation, 
construction, and financing of courtrooms or of a courtroom building or buildings 
containing facilities necessary or incidental to the operation of the justice system in 
the City and County of San Francisco; companion measure to File 97-92-44.1. 
(Municipal Court) 

(Cont'd from 7/29/92) 

ACTION: 

9. File 127-92-4 . [Dog Licenses] Ordinance amending the Municipal Code, Part III 
(Revenue and Business Regulations) by deleting Sections 215 through 219 and 222 to 
223 inclusive and amending Article 1 of the Health Code by adding Sections 41.15 
through 41.25, to require every person owning, keeping and controlling any dog over 
the age of four months to vaccinate said dog against rabies and to obtain a license 
for said dog requiring every person procuring a young dog from any animal shelter to 
obtain certificate for said young dog and setting forth exceptions and penalties. 
(Supervisor Migden) 

(Transferred from City Services Committee 7/21/92 - Fiscal Impact) 

ACTION: 

10 File 68-92-4.1 . [Home Program] Resolution approving procedures for allocating 
Home Program Funds, and authorizing the Mayor of the City and County of San 
Francisco to encumber and authorize release of a grant of Home Program Funds 
from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for a total amount not 
to exceed Eight Million, Two Hundred Six Thousand Dollars ($8,206,000). Direct and 
indirect costs associated with the acceptance of these grant funds will be paid by 
Community Development Block Grant Funds. (Mayor's Office of Economic Planning 
and Development) 

(Cont'd from 8/5/92) 

ACTION: 

11. File 65-92-12 . [Lease of Property] Ordinance authorizing and approving lease of 
City-owned property at 1800 Oakdale Avenue (Southeast Community Facility, 
northwest corner of Phelps Street and Oakdale Avenue) to Economic Opportunity 
Council of San Francisco, a non-profit corporation. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 



12. File 60-92-4.1 . [Ballot Argument] Ballot argument (First Draft) in favor of bond 
measure concerning seismic strengthening of unreinforced mL^onry buildings. 
(Supervisor Hsieh) 

ACTION: 

13. File 60-92-4.2 . [Ballot Argument] Ballot argument (First Draft) in favor of bond 
measure concerning construction and reconstruction of Fire Department facilities. 
(Supervisor Conroy) 

ACTION: 

14. File 60-92-4.3 . [Ballot Argument] Ballot argument (First Draft) in favor of bond 
measure concerning construction and reconstruction of correctional facilities. 
(Supervisor Gonzalez) 

ACTION: 



FINANCE COMMITTEE 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
ROOM 235, CITY HALL 
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 



IMPORTANT 
HEARING NOTICE 



SF Public Library (2) 
Document Section 



0313 



.as 




(public Library, "Documents "Dcpt. 
WTBi: Gerru%gtfi 

OF SAN FRANCISCO -* -> 



CITY AND COUNTY 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 MARKET STREET, SUITE 1025 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102 • TELEPHONE (415) 554-7642 



August 10, 1992 



4f 

Fman 



DOCUMENTS DPPT. 
AUG 1 2 1992 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



TO: Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst fie coM««^ri o«i 

SUBJECT: August 12, 1992 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item la - File 38-92-21 

Department Recreation and Park Department 

Item: Resolution authorizing the acceptance of a gift of cash for use 

by the Recreation and Park Department. 

Amount: $23,889 

Source of Gift Northern California Grant Makers 

Description; The proposed resolution would authorize the acceptance of a 

cash gift of $23,889 from the Northern California Grant 
Makers to be used by the Recreation and Park Department at 
various recreation centers, for after-school, latch-key, day 
camp and teen summer programs. 

Comments: 1. Mr. Joel Robinson of the Recreation and Park Department 

advises that this grant of $23,889 is actually the sum total of 
multiple grant awards. Mr. Robinson reported that the 
Directors of 55 of the City Department's 107 recreational 
centers applied for grants not exceeding $550 from the 
Northern California Grant Makers. Grants were awarded to 
53 of the 55 applicants based on the project description 
submitted by each of the Directors in the grant application. 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



2. The gift proceeds would be used by the Directors at each of 
the individual recreational centers to enhance their summer 
programs through the purchase of art and other necessary 
supplies for special projects. The Recreation and Park 
summer programs serve primarily youth between the ages of 
8 to 12 years. 

3. The acceptance of this gift would incur no additional costs 
for maintenance for the Recreation and Park Department. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Item lb - File 132-92-6 



Department: 

Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period; 
Source of Funds: 
Project: 

Description: 



Art Commission 

Resolution authorizing the San Francisco Art Commission 
(a) to continue to have Intersection for the Arts serve as the 
non-profit fiscal agent for the San Francisco Art Commission 
Gallery and (b) to continue sponsorship of the Gallery's 
"Exploration: City Site Program," and in that capacity to 
apply for, accept and expend a $7,500 George Frederick 
Jewett Foundation grant for City Site programming; indirect 
costs of a 10 percent fiscal agent fee in the amount of $750 will 
be paid to Intersection for the Arts from the grant. 

$7,500 

September 1, 1992 to June 30, 1993 

George Frederick Jewett Foundation 

San Francisco Art Commission Gallery's "Exploration: City 
Site" Program 

In June, 1992, the Board of Supervisors tabled a resolution 
authorizing the San Francisco Art Commission to permit 
Intersection for the Arts to continue to act as the non-profit 
fiscal agent for the San Francisco Art Commission Gallery 
and to continue sponsorship of the Gallery's "Exploration: 
City Site" Program; and in that capacity to apply for, 
retroactively, accept and expend a continuation private grant 
of $7,500 for "City Site" programming from the Lydia Ebert 
Foundation (LEF Foundation); including indirect costs of 10 
percent or $750, for a fiscal agent fee to be paid to Intersection 
for the Arts from the Art Commission's Public Arts Fund 
(File 132-92-5). This previous resolution was tabled because 
the LEF Foundation notified the Art Commission that the 
LEF Foundation did not approve this request for funding. 

On May 4, 1992, the Art Commission approved Resolution No. 
0504-92-222, authorizing Intersection for the Arts, on behalf of 
the Art Commission, to apply for, accept and expend $7,500 of 
grant funds from the George Frederick Jewett Foundation for 
the "Exploration: City Site" Program in fiscal year 1992-93. 
The Art Commission now requests that the Board of 
Supervisors approve the proposed resolution to have 
Intersection for the Arts apply for, accept and expend a new 
grant of $7,500 on behalf of the City for "City Site" 
programming from the George Frederick Jewett Foundation. 



B OARD O F SWEIWIS Q flS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



Budget: 



The Art Commission's "Exploration: City Site" Program has 
been in existence since 1986, providing opportunities for Bay 
Area artists to present large-scale, site-generated artistic 
installations in an undeveloped, highly visible site adjacent to 
the Art Commission's Gallery at 155 Grove Street. By 
providing the financial means and an experimental 
framework, "City Site" enables artists to develop skills in the 
fields of public art and urban design. Presently, the Art 
Commission Gallery is the only facility in the City with an 
outdoor site dedicated to temporary large scale site works. 

This would be the first time that the "City Site" Program has 
sought funding from the George Frederick Jewett 
Foundation, which does not make contributions directly to 
any governmental agency. Under the proposed resolution, 
Intersection for the Arts would apply for, accept and expend 
the proposed $7,500 grant on behalf of the City since it is the 
policy of the Jewett Foundation not to provide funding directly 
to governmental agencies. Intersection for the Arts, a non- 
profit agency, has acted as the sponsor and fiscal agent for 
the San Francisco Art Commission Gallery's "City Site 
Program" since May, 1991. 

The proposed grant would be used exclusively to pay for 
artists' materials, honoraria and indirect costs related to the 
projects of three artists commissioned under "Exploration: 
City Site '92." 



Artists' Honoraria: 




2 @ $1,000 


$2,000 


Artists' Materials 


4,750 


Indirect Costs 


750 



Total "City Site" Expenses 
Paid for by Proposed Grant 



$7,500 



Required Match: None. 



Indirect Costs: $750 or 10 percent of the proposed grant amount of $7,500. 

Comments: 1. Ms. Anne Meisner, Director of the Art Commission's 

Gallery, advises that the application deadline for the 
proposed grant is August 15, 1992, and it is anticipated that 
the George Frederick Jewett Foundation will respond to the 
grant request in late August, 1992. However, the Board of 
Supervisors cannot approve this resolution until August 17, 
1992. Therefore, the proposed resolution should be amended 
to enable the Art Commission, through Intersection for the 
Arts, to retroactively apply for the proposed grant. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

2. Attached is the Grant Application Information Form, as 
completed by the Art Commission. 

3. The Art Commission has completed a Disability Access 
Checklist for the proposed grant, which is in the file. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to enable the Art 
Commission, through Intersection for the Arts, to 
retroactively apply for the proposed grant. 

2. Approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Attachment 

"- 01/2 1/92 00:-in - ff-ll 5 554 5163 D<1 . /Supervl sort Pacrp I O t" 2 @1002 

.. m i 1 '"• " * "C^" 



Fi 1 c Niimbc r 



Grant_Appjjc _ation-Inforfflati onJ^ona 

A document required to accompany a proposed resolution 
Authorizing a Department to Apply tor a Grant 



To: The Board of Supervisors 
Attn: Clerk of the Board 

The following describes the grant referred to in the accompanying 
resolut ion : 

Department: San Francisco Arts Commission Gallery , 



Contact Person: Anne Meissner, Director Telephone: 554-9682 

Project Title: "F,y plnr^rion: CI ry Sirp" : _ 

Grant Source: George Frederick Jewett Foundation ■ 

Proposed OlewJvf Continuation Grant Project Summary: 

Established in 1986, City Site provides rare opportunities for Bay Area artists 
to present large-scale site-generated installations in an undeveloped, highly 
visible lot adjacent to the Gallery, located in Civic Center in the heart of 
the City's Performing Arts Complex. City Site's 1992 competition will be like 
those of the past with one exception. The Arts Commission wishes to expand 
the competitive base for applicants in' 1992. Project budgets will be allowed 
to exceed the $6,000.00 award provided by City Site. " This provision will allow 
applicants" to apply other outside grant monies or in-kind contributions to 
their project; it will increase funding required for interdisciplinary 
collaborative works; and it will challenge applicants to formulate ideas for 
the site without budget constrictions. As in the past, three outside jurors 
will review letters of intent from applicants; selecting up to five proposals 
for further development. It is hoped that three projects will merit awards. 



Amount of Grant . Funding Applied for: $7,500.00 



Maximum Funding Amount Available: $7 ,500. 00 



Required Matching Funds: . None 



Number of - Positions Created and Funded: 



Amount to be Spent on Contractual Services: $7,500.00 



Will Contractual Services be put out to Bid? yes — call for entr ies to 

artists/limited competition 



Grant Application Information Form 
Page 2 



Attachment 
Page 2 of 2 



Term of Grant: Sept. 1, 1992 through June JO. 1991 

Date Department Notified of Available funds: Sept. l , 1 99 2 
Application Due Date: August 15, 1992 



Grant Funding Guidelines and Options (from RFP, grant announcement or 
appropriations legislation): 

Letter of intent sufficient for application (see attached). 



Joanne 




^pprova 1 
Lnship, Director of Cultural Affairs 



' • Memo to Finance Committee 
• August 12, 1992 

Item lc -File 148-92-4.2 



Department: 
Item: 



Supplemental 
Grant Amount: 

Source of Funds: 



Grant Period: 
Grant Projects: 

Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 

Bureau of Epidemiology and Disease Control 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health to 
apply for retroactively and accept and expend a supplemental 
grant of $268,923, which includes indirect costs in the 
amount of $21,761 based on 20 percent of salaries, from the 
Department of Health and Human Services for the 
Tuberculosis Control Project and providing for ratification of 
action previously taken. 



$268,923 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) 

April 1, 1992 to January 31, 1993 

Tuberculosis (TB) Prevention and Control/Elimination 
Project and HrV-Related TB Prevention Project 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved a resolution 
(File 146-92-4. 1) authorizing the DPH to accept and expend a 
grant of $508,860 for the period April 1, 1992 to January 31, 
1993 for the Tuberculosis (TB) Prevention and 
Control/Elimination Project ($248,603) and HrV-Related TB 
Prevention Project ($260,257). The DPH now reports that it 
will receive an additional supplemental grant of $268,923 for 
these project services. Of the $268,923, $100,813 would be used 
to fund HrV-Related TB Prevention Project services and 
$168,110 would be used to fund Prevention and 
Control/Elimination Project services. 

The TB Prevention and Control/Elimination Project and the 
HIV-Related TB Prevention Project provide diagnostic 
treatment, surveillance, screening, case funding, registry 
and medical consultation, to assist in the reduction and 
control of tuberculosis with respect to the residents of San 
Francisco. Project objectives include (1) the assurance of 
adequate treatment of active TB cases by daily observed 
therapy, (2) the identification and treatment of infection in 
substance abuse clinics where HIV infection increases risk 
and (3) assistance in the reduction and ultimate elimination 
of tuberculosis through intensified outreach. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 








August 12, 1992 








Project Budgets: A. TB Prevention and CJoritrnl/TClimination Proiect 






Original 


Proposed 






Grant 


Grant 






Budget Supplemental Total 


Personnel 








1 Class 2808 Sr. Disease Control 








Investigator 


$37,483 


- 


$37,483 


3 Class 2585 Health Workers 


71,045 


- 


71,045 


1 Class Clerk Typist 


25,198 


- 


25,198 


1 Management Information System 








Specialist 


- 


$30,900 


30,900 


1 Class 2320 Registered Nurse 


- 


29,120 


29,120 


1 Class 2806 Disease Control Investigator 


24,403 


24,403 


1 Class 2808 Sr. Disease Control 








Investigator 


37.500 * 


- 


37.500 


(*Salary and Fringe Benefits) 








Subtotal - Salaries 


$171,226 


$84,423 


$255,649 


Bilingual Pay 


2,230 


1,167 


3,397 


Premium Pay 


875 


522 


1,397 



Fringe Benefits (27% of Personnel 36,106 - 36,106 

excluding the $37,500 salary/fringe 

benefits for one Class 2808 Sr. Disease 

Control Investigator) 

Fringe Benefits(27% of Salaries) : 22.795 22.795 



Subtotal - Personnel 

Operating Expenses 

Travel 

Training 

Staff Mileage 

Bus Tokens for Patients 

Laboratory Supplies 

Office Supplies 


$210,437 

$5,000 

2,600 
3,200 


$108,907 

$3,750 
165 

30,473 

250 

$34,638 

$5,000 

990 

1.690 


$319,344 

$8,750 

165 

2,600 

3,200 

30,473 

250 


Subtotal 

Equipment 

Personal Computer (2) 
Modem (2) 
Software 


$10,800 


$45,438 

$5,000 

990 

1.690 



Subtotal - $7,680 $7,680 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



Original Proposed 
Grant Grant 

Budget Supplemental Total 



Indirect Costs - (20% of Salaries 

excluding $37,500 salary/fringe 

benefits allocated for one Class 2808 

Sr. Disease Control Investigator) $27,366 



Indirect Costs (20% of Salaries) 
Subtotal 



TOTAL 



$27,366 
$248,603 



$16.885 
$16,885 



$27,366 
16.885 



$44,251 
$168,110 $416,713 



B. HIV Related TB Prevention Project 

Personnel 

1 Class 2808 S. Disease Control 

Investigator 
1 Class 2587 Health Worker III 
1 Class 2587 Health Worker IH 
.5 Class 1446 Secretary II 



1 Class 1424 Clerk Typist 
Subtotal - Salaries 

Premium Pay 

Fringe Benefits (27% of Salaries) 
Subtotal - Personnel 

Operating Expenses 
Bus Tokens for Patients & Passes 
Client Incentives (Food) 
Travel 

Staff Mileage 
Rent 

Office Supplies 
Medical Supplies 
Pharmaceuticals (INH and B65) 
Subtotal 

Equipment 
Telephone (2) 
Answering Machine 
FAX Machine 
Subtotal 



$5,833 
500 



2,312 

2,311 

2.311 

$13,267 



- $37,483 

24,137 

$24,137 24,137 

15,242 

25.198 



$37,483 
24,137 

15,242 

25.198 
$102,060 

245 

27.556 
$129,861 $30,896 $160,757 



$24,137 $126,197 

242 487 

6.517 34.073 



$500 $6,333 

900 1,400 

3,880 3,880 

900 900 

1,250 1,250 

600 2,912 

1,900 4,211 

: 2.311 

$9,930 $23,197 



$750 

400 

_224 



$750 

400 

_224_ 



$2,074 $2,074 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



l n 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



Original Proposed 
Grant Grant 

Budget Supplemental Total 



Contractual 

4 Project Site Half-Time Nurse 

($24,167 x 4) 
1 Registered Nurse (Full Time) 
Subtotal 

Indirect Costs (20% of Salaries) 

TOTAL 



$96,668 
$96,668 



$53.037 
$53,037 



$96,668 

53.037 

$149,705 



$ 20.461 $ 4.876 $ 25.337 
$260,257 $100,813 $361,070 



Required Match: None 



Indirect Costs: $21,761 ($16,885 for the TB Prevention and 

Control/Elimination Project plus $4,876 for the HIV Related 
TB Prevention Project. 

Comments: 1. As noted above, the DPH reports that the $37,500 allocated 

in the original grant budget for the salary and fringe benefits 
of one Class 2808 Senior Disease Control Investigator was 
excluded from the calculations for indirect costs (20% of 
salaries). According to the DPH, the indirect costs were 
calculated in this manner because the Department's original 
proposal submitted to the CDC had requested a Public Health 
Advisor contract position in the amount of $54,000. After 
being allocated only $37,500 for this position, the DPH 
requested and received approval from the CDC for the $37,500 
to be used to pay for the salary and fringe benefits of one 
Senior Disease Control Investigator. 

2. The Electronic Information Processing Steering 
Committee (EIPSC) has reviewed and approved the proposed 
data processing equipment for the TB Prevention and 
Control/Elimination Project. 

3. DPH applied for the proposed grant in mid-April of 1992 
and therefore the proposed resolution would authorize the 
DPH to apply for the grant funds retroactively. As noted 
above, the proposed supplemental grant has a start-up date of 
April 1, 1992. However, the DPH reports that the Department 
has not, as yet, incurred any expenditures against these 
grant funds. 

4. Attached is a Summary of Grant Request, as prepared by 
DPH, for the proposed grant. 



BOARD OF S UPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



11 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



5. The DPH has completed a Disability Access Checklist, 
which is in the file. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



HgaW ommicclnn • S ummar' 1 'ji-Gxaj Itmi^l 



Rev. 4/10/90 



CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL 
Crantor 

Contact Person Marsha D.Driggans/Grants 

Address 255 E. Paces Ferry Rd N.E. Rm 300 

' Mail Stop EH, Atlanta, GA 30305 



Division 

Section 



COMMUNITY PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES 
BEDC/TB Control 



Amount Requested S 
Term: From 4-1-92 
Health Commission 



268,923 



To 1-31-93 



Contact Person Frances Tay lor/Glsela Sch ecter M. 
Telephone 206-8524 (Dr. Schecte7T~ 

Application Deadline 

Notification Expected 



Doard of Supervisors: Finance Committee 
Full Doard 



Request to (apply for) (accept and expend) a2(KaiK)<^taJiH>eiiBK)^atoK3Uon) (augmentation to a) 

gram in the amount of S 268,923 fjom the period of 4-1-92 to 1-31-93 

b assistanc e in Lite — reduction and conLruI ui : : — 

to providt____ tuberculois »WiS»f 



T. Ttrm Prscrlptlnp; 



JT S l lmmHrV: ( CczawAurtary, »~4 i4£u*4; Hunfatf • pro*/p to*^; -=rviau uJpmoAji) 

Diagnostic treatment, surveillance, screening, case finding, registry and medical consu ltation 
have been supported by this project for 10 years.. The project serves all communities in 
San Francisco. This supplemental will also assist in upgrading laboratory services and 



diagnosis and research. 



TTT, Outcnmf</Qhlfftlve<: 

1. To assure adequate treatment of cases by daily observed therapy. 2. To identify and tr eat 
infection in Substance Abuse Clinics where HIV infection increases risk. 3. Assist in th e 
reduction of tuberculosis by intensified "outreach. 4. Laboratory upgrades for rapid diag nosis 2 

research. 
TV. F,H>ct< of Rfdtiftlnp nr Trmlnettnp, nf Thr<f Fup t'c; 

Daily observed therapy, screening and preventive therapy for infection in substance abuse sites 
would have to be discontinued. Intensified outreach, screening, educational activities, 
improved patient care and laboratory upgrades and research would not be realized. 



Financial Tn form b Hon; 



Col. 



Grant Amount 
Personnel 
Equipment 
'Contract Svc. 
Mat. & Supp. 
Facilities/Space 
Other /travel 
Indirect Costs 



Two Yei_-j Ago 

432,390 

269,173 

6,417 

93,173 



6,350 



-0- 



V T, 


F>?t? Prnf.ctin, 


(c 


„o bvJuac^; .Uo-O 


V TT, 


Pfrconn.l 



F/T CSC 
P/T CSC 
Contractual 



15,004 
42,373 



-0- 



8.0 



2.0 



12 mos. 
Cnl, B 
Piti Vctr/Orij. 
498,444 
323,143 

-0- 

104,000 

7,799 

-0- 

12,685 

49,997 



•-0- 



8.0 

. 5 



2.0 



10 mos 
Cnl. r 

Propoi;J 

268,923 



139,803 
9,754 

_53,037_ 
33,223 



1,250 
10,095 
21,761 

-0- 



4.0 

_Q. .. 
1 




+ 1,250 
+ J0,09_5_ 
+ 21,761 



-0- 




-0- 



-0- 



-0- 



-0- 



-0- 



-0- 



-0- 

-cr-~ 



ReQ: hlatfh App roved h< 

-^ 

-0- 



Source(s) of non- S rant funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this g 
None 



Will jrant funded employees be retaloed after this 
Ypr, bv placement in ad valorem positions. 



■.in terminates 



If so, How' 



•VTTT , rn Wt r P y t „pl g.rvl r ... Q pen Bil j S(iU . Source __*_ IB..'..- s «..»dlu* u cfc.fa»* H .F n | 

**Contractual funds will be work ordered to CSAS wliich will then contract via sole source 
for service delivery 



11 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Item Id -File 146-92-18.1 



Department: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 
Project: 
Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH), 

Division of Mental Health and Substance Abuse 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health, 
Division of Mental Health and Substance Abuse, to accept 
and expend a State grant of $25,000, which includes indirect 
costs of $1,190, based on 5 percent of the total award, for 
mental health treatment for Asian children. 

$25,000 

July 1, 1992 to June 30, 1993 

California Department of Developmental Services 

Play Groups for Dually Diagnosed Asian Children 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved a resolution 
authorizing the Department of Public Health to apply for a 
new grant of $25,000 from the California Department of 
Developmental Services (File 146-92-18). In the interim, the 
DPH has been notified of the awarding of the $25,000 by the 
State, so the DPH now requests authorization to accept and 
expend these funds. The purpose of the proposed grant of 
$25,000 is to provide specialized play groups for 12 dually 
diagnosed Asian children. Dually diagnosed children are 
those who are both developmentally delayed and have 
diagnosable mental health problems. A play group is a 
therapy group consisting of a therapist, a co-therapist, and a 
group of children aged five to ten, which involves both 
structured and spontaneous play. 

The overall goals of the specialized play groups are to: (1) 
identify dually diagnosed Asian children in need of 
improvement of their social skills; (2) improve the social 
competency at school for at least 75 percent of the project's 
participants; and (3) improve the social competency at home 
for at least 65 percent of the project's participants. 



Budget 



Personnel FTE Salary 

Social Worker 0.5 $18,030 

Fringe Benefits (23.6%) 4.262 

Total Personnel Costs 



$22,292 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



Required Match: 
Indirect Costs: 

Comments: 



Operating Expenses 

Local Travel @ $.25/mi. x 400 miles 
Playroom Supplies for Play Groups 
Testing Materials for Evaluation 
Staff Training (for intern and/or 
Social Worker) 

Total Operating Expenses 

Total Direct Costs 

Indirect Costs 

Total Project Budget 

None. 



$100 
718 
200 

_5QQ 



$1.518 
$23,810 
$ 1.190 
$25,000 



$1,190, based on 5 percent of direct costs of $23,810 (see 
Comment No. 1). 

1. Ms. Nancy Presson of the DPH advises that indirect costs 
will be approximately 5 percent of total direct costs of $23,810, 
or $1,190, rather than 5 percent of the total grant award of 
$25,000, as stated in the proposed resolution. Therefore, the 
proposed resolution should be amended in the title and body 
to state that indirect costs in the amount of $1,190, based on 5 
percent of direct costs of $23,810, are included in the grant. 

2. Although the contract which has been signed between the 
DPH and the California Department of Developmental 
Services states that the commencement date of the proposed 
grant is July 1, 1992, DPH has not yet received the $25,000 
grant. Ms. Presson reports that as of the writing of this 
report, no expenses have been incurred for this project by 
DPH. 

3. The half-time Social Worker noted in the budget will act as 
therapist and a Clinical Social Worker intern will act as co- 
therapist for the play groups, according to Ms. Presson. 

4. Attached is a copy of the Summary of Grant Application, 
as prepared by DPH. 

5. A copy of the Disability Checklist for Grant Applicants is 
included in the file. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



15 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to state that indirect costs 
in the amount of $1,190, based on 5 percent of direct costs of 
$23,810, are included in the grant. 

2. Approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



Cr -. r1 „r> ppt. of Dpyplo pnoot^i ni^^Kiiiti^c Dlvitu. Mental Health & Substance Abus 

Cont _ cl ,. trton s.ciio. Child, Adolescent & r-amTTy^ 

A « rc! > Com.c r«, w .i_iy--?____w__- : - 

Telephone _____ 255-3632 

,2S 000 11 .1 n Tr April 6, 1992 
Amount Kequeilcd S -____ . Application Dc.dl.nt _ [ . 

Term: From July 1, 19 92 To June 30, 1 993 NoMf , t .„ on Exptcud May 1, 1992 

Health Commission _ L_ Doard of Supervisors: Fir.aoce Committee March 25, 199 2 

Full no.r. March 30, 1992 

I. Iirm P f<crlr>tlorr. Rtqueslio r _cccpi and ___d) a (fPl^(conunuauon) (allocation) (augmentation lo a) 



( c-~i •m-v~- ~*> ,;_„! ^ _ t _nouni of S ?5.000 torn the. period of 7/1/92 to 6/30/93 

w provide child socialization groups to the resjggn___f San Fran c^u.^ 

Prov id e s pecia I i z ed play groups to young Asian children who are both developmentally 
delayed and have mental health problems. . • - 

Hi- Pin . »rnts/Ob]fcHv f c; A To identify dually diagnosed (DD/MD) Asian .children in need 
of improvement in social skills. B. To improve social competency m their school envlron - 

mpnt for at least 7__ of the project's participants. C. To improve social competency at 

home for, at least __ o f the pr oject's participants. 

_L F.ffff't* "f BxJ-Jtd- Ul or Tfrmintl!"n of Thtsr r \)t>d<: 
Croups to serve twelve (12) dually diagnosed children will not be offered. 



v, Ei-L m s 1—1 Lalgrj____ 



Grant Amount 


Col. A 
T*o Vci.-i Ajo 

- - 


Col, B 
P«i Yt»f/Ori{. 

- - 


Prop«»i.e! 

25,000 
23,810 


Col. 

ChUt; 

+ 25 
+23 


P 
000 


Personnel 


- - 


- - 


810 


Equipment 








Contract S v c . 












Mat. & Supp. 












Fa cllltles/Sp ace 












Other 












Indirect Costs 


- - 


- o - 


1,190 


+ 1, 


190 


VT. DM2 rrof.. 


c|~,. 








VII. ?T^n-l 
F/T CSC 












P/T CSC 












CoDtriclual 













Reg. Match Anpro'fO h< 
None 



None 



Source(s) of noD-_rJDl (updlnj [or salaries of CSC employees 'workloj parl-tiroc oo Ibis ^rant: 



Will w r«nl funded employees be retained after this jranl terminates? If so, Hov? 
No. unless revenue neneration throuoh third parties supports positions. 



_!__ r___jrj_tj_J c T'ic-<: Open Bid" , Sole Source 



1 7 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Itemle - File 146-92-33.1 



Department 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 



Department of Public Health (DPH), 

Community Public Health Services, Epidemiology and 

Disease Control, 

Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Control Division 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health to 
apply for, accept and expend a grant of $700,468, which 
includes indirect costs in the amount of $7,798, based on 20 
percent of salaries, from the Centers for Disease Control for a 
research study to evaluate HD7 counseling models. 

$700,468 



Grant Period: September 30, 1992 to September 29, 1993 

Source of Funds: Centers for Disease Control (CDC) 

Project STD Research - Current Versus Enhanced HP/ Counseling 

Description: The Board of Supervisors approved a resolution (File 146-91- 

70) in September, 1991 to authorize the DPH to apply for, 
accept and expend a grant of $560,641, including indirect 
costs of $11,000, based on 20 percent of personnel costs, from 
the CDC for a research project to evaluate HrV counseling 
models, and to authorize the expenditure of grant funds to 
establish and finance Civil Service positions for the provision 
of HrV risk reduction services. This $560,641 represented 
funding for the first phase of a five-year program from the 
CDC. 

The primary goal of the five-year program is to evaluate the 
effectiveness of an enhanced counseling model through 
studies conducted among sexually transmitted disease (STD) 
clinic clients. 

During the first phase of the project, funding was used to 
hire and train staff, negotiate a contract between the DPH 
and the University of California, San Francisco, and pilot test 
one behavioral intervention model with STD Clinic clients. 

The proposed grant (marking the beginning of the second 
phase of the study, which is expected to last a total of four 
years) will be used to fund additional pilot testing of several 
other behavioral intervention models with STD Clinic clients; 
to make a final determination of the particular behavioral 
intervention model which will be used with patients seen in a 
STD Clinic and to compare their behavior changes with 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



Program Budget: 



patients seen in a STD Clinic who receive a standard single 
HIV counseling session; and to fund pilot testing of the 
behavioral intervention model that is chosen. San Francisco 
is one of five sites to implement this two-phased study, and 
San Francisco's portion of the study is expected to involve one 
site (the San Francisco City Clinic located at 356 7th Street) 
and approximately 400 STD clients during the grant period of 
September 30, 1992 to September 29, 1993. 

Only current recipients of STD Prevention and Training 
Center funds (of which the City's STD Control Division is one) 
are eligible to apply for this particular grant. Of the proposed 
grant of $700,468, a total of $524,484 will be spent on 
contractual services with UCSF, which is required by the 
CDC as a condition for receiving the proposed grant. One 
Civil Service personnel position (1450 Executive Secretary) 
will be created and funded by the proposed grant. If grant 
funds expire, this Civil Service position will be terminated. 



Personnel 
Secretary 

Fringe Benefits @ 25 
Total Personnel 



FTE 
1.0 



$38,991 
9.655 



Travel 

4 out-of-State meetings pertaining 
to the STD Study 

Equipment 
1 Shredder 

Materials and Supplies 
Office Supplies 
Computer Supplies 
Clinical Supplies 
Educational Supplies 
Subtotal of Materials and Supplies 



$48,646 

4,400 
2,000 



500 

500 

1,000 



5,200 



BOARD OF S UPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



19 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



Operating Expenditures 




Printing (Reports, questionnaires, 




narratives, other correspondence) 


$2,050 


Postage 


650 


Brochures & other materials 




for participants 


5,000 


Telephone 


5,100 


Rental Space 


29,260 


Stipend provided for client 




participation 


43,000 


Non-Cash incentives for 




participating clients 


8,000 


Laboratory Costs 


13,880 


Translation Services (quest- 




ionnaires and consent forms 




into Spanish) 


1.000 


Total Operating Expenditures 





Subtotal Non-Contract Services 



Contract Services 



Personnel 


FTE 




Project Coordinator 


1.0 


$59,742 


Intervention Coord. 


1.0 


49,110 


Study Workers 


3.0 


97,176 


Study Counselors 


1.5 


63,450 


Data Manager 


1.0 


39,402 


Data Entry Clerk 


0.5 


13,899 


Nurse Practitioner 


0.5 


25,321 


Admin. Assistant 


0.15 


5.450 


Subtotal 




$353,550 


Fringe Benefits @ 26% 




91.923 


Total Personnel 


8.65 




Travel 






8 out-of-state meetings 






pertaining to the STD Study 




8,800 


Staff travel -local 




1.800 


Subtotal Travel 







Subtotal Contract Costs 

Indirect Contractual Costs (15% of Total Contract) 
Total Contract Costs 

Total Direct Costs (Non-Contract + Contract Costs 
Total Indirect Costs @ 20% of non-contract salaries 
Total Budget 



$107.940 
$168,186 



$445,473 



10.600 

$456,073 

68,411 

$524,484 

692,670 

7.798 

$700,468 



BOARD OF SU PERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



20 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Required Match: None 

Indirect Costs: $7,798, or 20 percent of non-contract salaries (excluding 

fringe benefits) 

Comments: 1. Ms. Wendy Wolf of the DPH reports that if these funds are 

not received, the result would be the end of the research 
project. 

2. The application for the proposed grant was submitted on 
June 18, 1992. Therefore, the proposed resolution should be 
amended to authorize the DPH to apply for the proposed grant 
retroactively. 

3. On June 16, 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved a 
resolution (File 146-92-33) authorizing the Department of 
Public Health to apply for a grant of $650,705. Subsequently, 
the Department of Public Health applied for the proposed 
grant of $700,468. This proposed grant of $700,468 is to replace 
the previously approved amount of $650,705. Therefore, the 
Department of Public Health is requesting that the Board of 
Supervisors rescind the previously approved grant 
application for $650,705 (File 146-92-33) and approve the 
proposed resolution to apply for, accept and expend $700,468 
(File 146-92-33.1). The proposed resolution should be 
amended to rescind this previous grant application (File 146- 
92-33). 

4. The Grant Application Information Form, as prepared by 
the DPH, is attached. 

5. The DPH has completed a Disability Access Checklist, 
which is in the file. 

6. As previously noted, the prior year's grant was funded in 
the amount of $560,641. This proposed request of $700,468 
represents an increase of $139,827, or approximately a 24.9 
percent increase. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution in both the body and the 
title to authorize the DPH to apply for the proposed grant 
retroactively. 

2. Amend the proposed resolution in both the body and title to 
rescind File 146-92-33, authorizing the Department of Public 
Health to apply for a grant of $650,705. 

3. Approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 






. ^fnr ni^paqp Control Division Community FuDlic Heaitn 

( Linda Long Section Disease Control/STD Control 

/ East Paces Ferry Rd. N.E. Contact Person Wendy Wolf 

jlanta, Ga . 30305 Telephone 864-8100 

.quested S 700, 468 Application Deadline 6/18/92 

From 9/30/92 To 9/29/93 Notification Expected 8/18/92 

Commission . Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Doird 



j £m Prvrrlpiinn; Request to (2pr>|yj(p$ (accept and expend) 2 (Mtt) (continu2rion) (S)c3cMXK?^g#&Ki8&jrv^&^) 

** **"**" -- <w gram - m &. amount of S 700.468 from ihe period of 9/30/92 io 9/29/93 

10 prnvirlr. onhanrpH HTV r nunsRling Services. 



Siimrn ? r v; ( c<naAi™rj-. <~*j. ^6^—oi: »«o>k= » pt~t» ^^t; ^n 
his is the second year of a 5 year research study. The first year of the study 
ocused on hiring staff, negotiating the contract, and developing and pilot testing 
pypral behavioral interventions designed to enhance the HIV counseling given to 5TD ~ 
■Hrnp r-lip.nrs. The second year of the study will involve pilot testing several more 
htprvpnrions and then developing both an enhanced and a standardized counseling model 
tor use during the duration ot the study. 

T. Ou t cnme<:/Obi f cti vt <:; 

determine the most effective means of providing risk-reduction counseling for 

TD clinic clients who take the HIV antibody test. 

1 •P,rr*rt<: nf R .-pi t i C t inn nr T>-min;tinn of Tn,<» Sags 

TP cOinxc plipnt-q will not receive the most effective risk-reduction counseling for 
IV anrl a±12 hp ar gre'ater risk for exposure to HIV. 

Financial Tnfnrroe tinn: 

Col. j _ Cnl. B Col. C Cni. D Rec. Mztch Apprnv.tf V 

Two Vurs Ajo ?ls: V^ir/Orij. ?rooos:d C=i_-.»c 

rant Amount 560, 6A1 70 0,468 + 139,827 ______ 

ersonnel 69,300 48,646 - 20,654 

oulnment 4,350 2,000 - *, 35U 

o'ntract Svc. 418,807 524,484 + g3Tg77 

lat. & Supp. 8,300 5,200 - 3.1UU 

acilities/Scace- ° U U 

, ther ' ZZZH 48,884 112,340 + 63 > A5fe 

ndirect Costs ^___^ 11,000 7,798 ■ - 3,202 

ndirect costs are based on 20% of personnel salaries, excluding fringes 

■T. P ?! ; Prn r .cono 

i«..«w.vJj 3,650 - 3,650 

■•I I , P>rcnnn.l 

TT CSC 2.0 1.0 - 1-0 

7T CSC 



:oDtractual 7.5 8.65 + 1.15 



• ou.-ce(s) of 
/A 


D0D-jr2nt funding 


'or S2l2ri;s 


of 


CSC employees —orki:g pir 


-time oc 


this 


Srzat: 




Vill grant 


funded emplovees be 


retained 2f 


itr 


this grant terminiles? If so, 


Kow? 







^HL C"-'tr ? r t ,, pl c;. rv ; r .<. gj^ Sol; Sov .--. 



ta-j=»io:;»n) 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Item If - File 146-92-34.1 



Department: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 
Project: 

Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH), 
Community Public Health Services 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health to 
accept and expend a continuation grant of $378,916, which 
includes indirect costs of $27,766 based on 20 percent of 
personnel salaries, from the Centers for Disease Control for 
the provision of alternative Sexually Transmitted Disease 
services. 

$378,916 

September 28, 1992 to September 27, 1993 

Centers for Disease Control (CDC) 

Community-Based Sexually Transmitted Disease Services 
Research Project 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved a resolution 
authorizing the DPH to apply for a continuation Federal 
grant in the amount of $420,858 for the Community-Based 
Sexually Transmitted Disease Services Research Project. In 
the interim, the CDC has notified the DPH that it will be 
awarded a grant amount of $378,916, or $41,942 less than the 
$420,858. This is the final year of a three-year grant program. 

The Community-Based Sexually Transmitted Disease 
Services Research Project is aimed at providing convenient, 
accessible and culturally sensitive sexually transmitted 
disease services in a community-based setting. The proposed 
grant funds would be used by the DPH to provide community- 
based Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) services and 
outreach services targeted at the Bayview Hunters Point 
area. The DPH is responsible for administering and 
coordinating the project, as well as providing some direct 
STD treatment services to project clients. The DPH is 
proposing to continue to contract with Bay View Hunters 
Point Foundation to (1) provide neighborhood street-based 
outreach services for adolescents and adults who are at risk 
for STD's (including HD7) and in need of family planning or 
prenatal services, (2) recruit individuals to seek health care 
at community-based STD clinics, facilitate attendance at 
these clinics, and provide on-going follow-up and education 
and (3) provide data collection support for the community- 
based STD clinics, including patient registration, 
maintenance of medical records, labeling of lab slips, 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



No. of Persons 
tobe Served: 

Project Budget 



answering phones, scheduling follow-up and referral 
appointments and data entry of the medical records data. 



Approximately 3,600 client visits 

Personnel FTE 

Physician Assistant 1.0 
Health Program Coordinator II 1.0 

Health Worker III 1.0 

Subtotal - Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 

Subtotal 3.0 

Operating Expenses 
Travel 

Staff Mileage 
Laboratory Supplies 
Office Supplies 
Clinical Supplies 
Pharmaceuticals 
Computer Supplies 
Educational Supplies 
Rent 

Xeroxing/Printing 
Postage 

Subtotal 

Contractual Services 

Bayview Hunters Point Foundation 

Indirect Costs 

Total 



$55,452 

51,960 

31,416 

$138,828 

36.095 



$1,275 
1,440 

12,200 
1,500 
1,750 
1,700 
1,000 
4,720 
5,040 
1,200 
100 



Required Match: None 



$174,923 



31,925 

144,302 

27.766 

$378,916 



Indirect Costs: $27,766 (20% of salaries) 

Comments: 1. The DPH advises that it will continue to contract with Bay 

View Hunters Point Foundation on a sole source basis, due to 
the need for continuity of the project and because the 
Foundation is intimately familiar with the goals, objectives 
and methodology of the project. 

2. The DPH reports that when the grant funds are terminated 
for this project the grant funded positions will also be 
terminated. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



24 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



3. Attached is a Summary of Grant Request, as prepared by 
the DPH, for the proposed grant funds. 

4. The DPH has completed a Disability Access Checklist 
which is in the file. 



Recommendation; Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SU PERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



?s 



C nan lor Centers for Disease Control Division r^mmnnirv Publi c Health 

Cbriiaci Person Lyn Mercer Section Disease Control/STD Control 

Address 7SS F.acr Pares Ferry Rd . N.E. Conlad Pernor. M a n d y Unl f 

Arlanra, Ca ■ 30305 Telephone 864-8100 . 

Amount Requested S 378,916 Application Deadline 6/12/92, 

Term: From a/?P./q? To 9/27/93 Notification Expected 8/12/9 2 

Health Commission Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 

Full Board 



T. Itrm p-<rrlption: R.q ucsl ^ (xpCplxXKCj (accr.pl and expand) 2 COttt) (connnu2non)Xai>3UiMX5^pa£Ki£Mfi;iQQ§ 
ic«k .f*..^- --*) z?znl ^ ,],. amount of S 378,916 from the period of 9/28/92 to 9/27/93 

10 pmvi'rl- rnTnmiiniry-riaspd STP) clin ical carp and outreach service: 

XT ^ limm ? r ^'l l Cocfc cr VWCTT'. mc/ ^U^-c^-o^; sumtcr * poii)* msV; »a*noti ux! p r w vfcn ) 

This is the final year of a 3 year grant. The first 2 years focused on hiring staff, 
ne gotiating contracts, and providing clinical care- and outreach services to high ffsk 
persons in 2 high STD incidence areas of San Francisco. The 3rd year of the grant will 
focus on providing community-based STD services and outreach in the City's highest STD 

incidence area - Bayview Hunters Point. 

TTT. Outcome <:/Qbi rc: ; vr*: 

Dpyplnp. implement and evaluate innovative and alternative approaches to STD care. 

Increase access to "STD care. 

Identify and decrease the reservoir of STD in San Francisco. 

TV, V.ff-ct* nf B'duf^,-, nr Timing tinn nf Th.t. ~l'"cj<: 



S an Franrisr-n has nnc of the highest STD rates in the nation. Many high risk persons are 
lmHprsprverl , arrp^K to bare in their neighborhoods is poor and many are unaware of our 
g PT-vir-ps . Thpsp funds would improve both access and service delivery and improve outreach 
efforts in high risk communities in San Francisco. . 



r in zn cj al : n for 



Col. A . Col. B Col. C Col. D 

Tm, c V«rj Ago ?tr. Vtir/Onj. proposed Cr.ir.ji 

Grant Amount 185,230 361,209 378,916 +17,707 

Personnel 63,334 154,281 174,923 +2 0,64 2 

Zouiomer. t 







'Contract Svc. 83,537 137,747 144,302 + 6,555 



Mat. Sz Sunn. 22,720 38,770 22,870 -15,900 



Facilities/SDace ° ° 

Other 5,665 6,515 9,055 + 2,540 

Indirect Costs** 9,974 24,296 27,766 ■ + 3,470 

** Indirect Costs are based on 20% of personnel salaries, excluding fringes 

V~. T-) ? t; Wnr-.ti^r 

C.«l.*4iW~] 



D » -«- 



CSC 1.5 2.5 3.0 



?/T CSC .5 



Contractual 4.0 4.0 4.0 



Source(s) of non-gr;:: f-jnding for salaries of CSC emnlovees ^orkirg sart-tirae on this grant: 
N/A 



'•■'ill grant funded e— ployees be retained after this grant terminates? If so, Kovr? 
No. 

-VTT T^ — r n -,t- ? .,., ; i c.- v ; r . c . 0ptn B;| j Sol . Source X r ^^ t 



26 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Item lg -File14fi-92-55 



Department: 

Item: 

Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 

Source of Funds 

Project 
Description' 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
Laguna Honda Hospital (LHH) 

Resolution authorizing DPH to accept and expend a new 
Federal Hazard Mitigation grant with a required match of 
$215,000, which is 100 percent of the total award, and waiving 
indirect costs. 

$215,000 

Beginning 180 days from acceptance of the grant and ending 
360 days from acceptance of the grant, or a six month period. 

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) through 
the California State Office of Emergency Services 

Emergency Generator Relocation 

In October, 1990, the Board of Supervisors authorized the 
Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) to apply for Hazard 
Mitigation Grant funding from the FEMA for City projects to 
mitigate against future hazards due to earthquakes (File 133- 
90-2). The CAO submitted an application for various projects 
totalling $17,739,789 which included $215,000 to relocate 
LHH's emergency electricity power generator. 

Structural engineers from the Office of Statewide Health 
Planning and Development recommended that LHH relocate 
the emergency electricity power generator from its temporary 
location on a truck trailer mounted on wooden blocks to a 
permanent anchorage in a building. In order to comply with 
the State's recommendation and based on the Bureau of 
Architecture's preliminary estimate of costs for the project, 
LHH has accumulated funding totalling $539,000 over several 
years for a Capital Improvement Project to relocate the 
emergency electricity power generator. However, the lowest 
bid for construction was $476,000 which when added to 
construction change orders totalling approximately $44,000 
increases the total construction cost for the project to $520,000 
and the total project cost to $754,000 (see the project budget 
below for details). The proposed FEMA grant would fund the 
$215,000 increase in the project cost from the preliminary 
estimate of $539,000 to the revised estimate including the low 
bid for construction costs and the construction change orders 
of $754,000. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



27 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Project Budget The Bureau of Architecture estimates the project costs for 

relocation of the emergency electricity power generator as 
follows: 



Construction 

Construction Management 
Design and Constr. Admin. 
Project Management 
Inspections 
Permits and Testing 
Contingencies 



FEMA 


City 


Project 


Grant 


Costs 


Total 


$215,000 


$305,000 


$520,000 





25,000 


25,000 





90,000 


90,000 





22,000 


22,000 





25,000 


25,000 





12,000 


12,000 





60,000 


60.000 



Project Total 



$215,000 $539,000 $754,000 



Required Match: 



Indirect Costs: 



Comments: 



100 percent of FEMA funding. $215,000 of the $305,000 
budgeted for the City's cost for construction in the Capital 
Improvement Project budget is considered to be the 100 
percent match to the $215,000 FEMA grant. 

Not allowed by FEMA. Therefore, the proposed resolution 
would authorize DPH to waive indirect costs. 

1. A Disability Access Checklist, which was submitted by the 
DPH, is in the file. 

2. The "Summary of Grant Request" as prepared by DPH is 
attached. 

3. According to LHH, the term of the grant specified by 
FEMA is intended to insure that FEMA funds are promptly 
used for a project. LHH indicates that completing the project 
by December, 1992, will comply with the terms of the grant, 
as detailed above. 

4. Through a competitive bid process, the Bureau of 
Architecture selected the lowest of five bidders, the local 
construction firm of General Engineering and Machine 
Works. Construction began in March, 1992, and is expected to 
be completed by December, 1992. General Engineering and 
Machine Works is neither a Minority Business Enterprise 
(MBE) nor a Women Business Enterprise (WBE). 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



28 



Attachment 



iicra f\o. 



hraiin Lamunisanp - summac "f r ^^t Essds s ^ i r cv . 4/1 0/90 1 



Cr.n.crvi a Office of Emergency Services, S t. of C*, vision 8 5 LaglUaJtonda Hr 

Contact Person Charles F. Wynne _ ., nft ^""f-tlQnaa fc 

nffj™ rz g —?. : . Section Uo Operations 

kAAr Orrice or Emergency Services , rr-^ 

9 «nn m m r- 5 — — Cont " ct Person La "rence J. Funk ^ 

2 800 Mea,dowview Road, Sac. , CA 9582 2 Telephone 41S-7Sq-7U7 ?g— — 

■ Notification Expected 



Health Commission 



— Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 
Full Doard 






ffi: 



Outcome s/Qbifft 



n- —l T S ^ . yr " ln " ™ " g~g -^ I- ■* ^-a Honda 



TV, ££££&< of TR^riiirtioT 



vin?tinn nf Th f<P "pnrjt; 



G rant is nnp-r-inip rap-ir^ i expenditure 



Financial Tnforme tion: 



Col. 



Two Vein Ajo 

Grant Amount ^A 

Personnel 

Equipment 

"Contract Svc. 

Mat. & Supp. 

Facilities/Space 

OtberWORK ORDER TO PUBLIC WORKS 
Indirect Costs 



VI. n 



Prn r >c.;n 



MA. 



Col. C 
Proo oi sd 

2 15; 000 



215,000 




Col, fj 

Cii.--.it 

NA 



Hec. Match , 

215,000 

Q_ 

Q_ 



o 



215.000 



.Anorovfd Vi 



-ilA- 



F/T CSC 
P/T CSC 
Contractual 



1tt- 



■tfft- 



S G^lolelTfZZV£r?* Z f ° r Sa,ari " ° f CSC emp, °- V " S WOrkiD = >«"■-• on this .rant- 
ant funded employees be retained after this -rani terminates? If so, Ho~? 



Will 

NA 




Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Item lh - File 146-92-56 



Department: 



Item: 



Grant Amount: 
Grant Period: 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
AIDS Office 

Resolution authorizing DPH to accept and expend an 
augmentation grant of $66,547, which includes $8,564 in 
indirect costs based on 20% of personnel costs, to continue 
funding the AIDS Surveillance and Expanded Initiatives 
Project. 

$66,547 

August 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992 

Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for 
Disease Control (CDC) 

AIDS Surveillance and Expanded Initiatives Project 

In July, 1991 the Board of Supervisors approved a resolution 
authorizing DPH to accept and expend a continuation 
Federal grant to fund the third and final year of the AIDS 
Surveillance and Expanded Initiatives Project, (File 146-91- 
31.1). However, instead of terminating the project, the CDC 
decided to incorporate the activities of the AIDS Surveillance 
and Expanded Initiatives Project into their larger AIDS 
Surveillance Project which is funded on a January through 
December funding cycle. Therefore, the proposed five month 
funding for this augmentation grant would support the AIDS 
Surveillance and Expanded Initiatives activities from the end 
of its current funding cycle on July 31, 1992 until the 
beginning of its new cycle on January 1, 1993. The proposed 
augmentation grant would continue funding for the 
following two projects: 

National Death Index (NDI) Match - The NDI Match project 
matches the National Death Index, an index of death 
certificates categorized by cause of death, with the San 
Francisco DPH Case Registry to evaluate the completeness of 
reporting and to obtain information on the underlying cause 
of death for reported persons with AIDS. 

Surveillance Evaluation of AIDS Reporting Completeness 
(SEARCH) - The SEARCH project proposes to assess the 
completeness of AIDS case reporting, and to assess the 
spectrum of HIV related disease in San Francisco during 
1990 by analyzing computerized outpatient visit records from 
the San Francisco Primary Care database. 



B OAHD O F SUPERVISOR S 
BUDGET ANALYST 



30 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



Budget: 



NDI Project 



Personnel 


FTE 




Disease Control Investigator 


1.0 


$16,104 


Programmer Analyst 


0.2 


3.655 


Personnel Subtotal 




$19,759 


Fringe Benefits @ 26% 




5.137 


Total Personnel 


1.2 


$24,896 


Materials and Supplies 






Office Supplies 




300 


Operating Costs 






Postage 




100 


Telephone 




660 


Rent 




958 


Reproduction Costs 




125 


Total Other 




1.843 



Subtotal Project 

Indirect Costs (20% of Personnel excluding 
Fringe Benefits) 
Total Project 



SEARCH Project 

Personnel 

Epidemiologist 

Disease Control Investigator 

Personnel Subtotal 
Fringe Benefits @ 26% 

Total Personnel 

Materials and Supplies 
Office Supplies 

Travel 

Operating Costs 
Telephone 
Rent 
Postage 
Total Operating Costs 



FTE 

1.0 

0.4 



1.4 



27,039 

3.952 

$30,991 



$16,620 

6.442 
$23,062 

5.996 
$29,058 



250 
188 



550 
798 
100 



Project Subtotal 
Indirect @ 20% of Personnel excluding 
Fringe Benefits 
Project Total 

Grand Total of NDI Project and SEARCH Project 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



1.448 

30,944 

4.612 
$35,556 

$66,547 



31 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Indirect Costs: $3,952 for the NDI Project and $4,612 for the SEARCH Project, 

based on 20 percent of Personnel excluding Fringe Benefits, 
for a total of $8,564. 

Required Match: None 



No. of Persons 
Served: 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



The proposed grant would be used to continue an analysis of 
the trend of the AIDS disease throughout the general 
population of San Francisco. 

1. As noted above, this augmentation grant will provide 
funding from August 1, 1992 until December 31, 1992 to 
bridge the gap between the current funding cycle ending on 
July 31, 1992, and the new funding cycle beginning on 
January 1, 1993. The DPH advises that if grant funds are 
terminated or reduced, personnel would be temporarily 
terminated or reduced until the project is incorporated into 
the CDC's AIDS Surveillance Project in January, 1993. The 
proposed grant augmentation includes a total of 2.6 FTEs in 
the Department of Public Health. 

2. The "Summary of Grant Request" as prepared by DPH is 
attached. 

3. Mr. Tim Piland of the AIDS Office reports these grant 
funded services have been effective since August 1, 1992. 
Therefore the proposed resolution should be amended to 
authorize DPH to accept and expend these grant funds 
retroactively. 

Amend the proposed resolution to authorize DPH to accept 
and expend these grant funds retroactively. 

Approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



/° 



; ior 

Sntact 
/Address 



ftfaUfr ( 'ommi^iop - Summnrv n{ Grant R»ni' »<:f 

Dept of Health and Human Services 
Centers for Disease Control 



■VI 0/90 



Person Edwin Dixon 



CO/AIDS Div 



CDC; 255 East Paces Ferry R d 
Atlanta, GA 30305 



AIDS Office 



Amount Requested S 66,547 
Term: From 8/1/92 
Health Commission 



To 12/31/9? 



Division ■ 

Section 

Contact Person 

Telephone 554-91 37 

Application Deadline "One 
Notification Expected 



Tim Piland 



n/a 



Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 
Full Board 



J. Item. Description: 



TT, SuFirnsrv: (Ca=c*v^ 



Request u, (apptjc**) (accept and expend) a jtam) (conunuarion) (xBoestt^ (a^rneniarion'tn ri 

grant m die amount of S 66,547 torn ^ period of 8/1/92 t0 12/31/ 92 

10 prov^de continuation of AIDS Survei llance /Expanded fSt H tly - ~ 



:d ""™° i : Du=bcr » trr.™ ^r^i: .rvjau urfpr^ifcr,) 

Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has decided to fund these ,;,..,,.. . through its lareer 

ITT. Outcnmes/Qhierfi ve<;- - " 




AIDS reporting xn San Francisco and decrease our AIDS health care jTjm gng^^jficant 



Financial Information- 



Grant Aaouat 
Personnel 
Equipment 
"Contract Svc - 
Mat. & Supp. 
Facilities/Space 
Other 
Indirect Costs 




a/i/yi- 

,■12731/92 
17-month 
Col. C 



8/1/92- 
12/31/92 
5-month "bridge" 



VT. 



Para P-r 



3.652 



VTT 



F/T CSC 
P/T CSC 
Contract: 



3.0 



• Propo: 

265 


;ed 
■&" 

,724\ 


199 


,874 








2, 


,470 


7. 


,884 


23. 


,770 


31, 


,726 ■ 





3. 










Cnl. D 



Cling: 

66 


,547 


53 


.954 








550 


1, 


,756 


1, 


,723 


8. 


564 





+ 










Ree. Match 



none 



Source(s) o; D on-o rant fundiog for s . |aries ^ 
None . 



employees working part-time on this 



;rar.: f-jaded e 



mplovees be retni-^prl ,rrjr »i.:« 
r . ue related alter this grant terminates? If s 




^HL-C_£— ZC J^I S.r»ir.«- 0peD 



Bid 



Sole Source none 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Item li- File 146-92-57 



Department: 

Item: 

Grant Amount: 
Grant Period- 
Source of Funds: 

Project: 
Description: 



Project Budget 

Required Match: 
Indirect Costs: 
Comments: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 
AIDS Office 

Resolution authorizing DPH to apply for a continuation 
grant, which includes indirect costs, based on 20 percent of 
salary costs to continue funding the AIDS Prevention Project. 

$6,250,000 

January 1 through December 31, 1993 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for 
Disease Control (CDC) 

AIDS Prevention Project 

These funds would continue to support a wide array of AIDS 
prevention programs. The goal of the AIDS Prevention 
Project is to prevent the transmission of HrV/AIDS infection 
in San Francisco. The services and programs that would be 
conducted with funding from this grant would include: 

Counseling and Testing 

Partner Notification and Referral 

Health Education and Risk Reduction 

Minority Initiatives 

Public Information 

Early Intervention (with special emphasis on establishing 

linkages with Counseling and Testing activities) 

Genital Ulcer Disease Study 

Evaluation 

According to DPH, a budget and detailed description of AIDS 
Prevention activities funded by this grant would be submitted 
with the request to accept and expend the proposed grant. 

None 

20 percent of salary costs. 

1. A Disability Access Checklist, which was submitted by the 
DPH, is in the file. 

2. The proposed grant of $6,250,000, represents an increase of 
$150,865 or 2.5 percent, over the 1992 grant of $6,099,135. 

3. The DPH advises that if grant funds are terminated or 
reduced, personnel would be terminated or reduced 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



■XL 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



accordingly. In 1992, approximately 51.65 full-time equivalent 
positions were funded by this grant. 

4. The "Summary of Grant Request" as prepared by DPH is 
attached. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

35 



Attachment 



Amount Requested S 6,250,000 

Term: From 1/1/93 To 12/31/93 



Division • 

Section 

Contact Person 
Telephone 



CO/AIDS Div 



item No. . Health Ommi5S'"r>P - Summary of Grant Request 

Dept of Health .- Human Srvs 
Grantor Centers for Dise^e Control 
Contact Person E. Taylor/J. Stubbs 
Address CDC; 255 East Paces Ferry Rd 

Atlanta, GA 30305 



AIDS Office 



Tim Piland 



554-9132 



Application Deadline 9/18/92 



Notification Expected 1 1 /15/92 



Health Commission 



Board of Supervisors: Finance Committee 
Full Board 



T. Item Description: 



Request to (apply for) (eccpfcamkoKpcftdd a (siant) (conunuaa'on)j(3ikx3Ebx^Ksircae$UE«HX(£g^ 

grant in the amount of 5 6.250.000 from the period of 1/1/93 to 12/31/93 

to provide continued funding for AIDS Prevention Project services. 



TT ^ lim TT12_r^*" ( f~f-rf r r-V i rmrv^ pned mjjj^Lm^j- Dtcnber * £rocp« tencii: ■—■"icej ma* p wi daa ) 

These funds will continue to support (along with additional State and Local funding ) 
a wide array of AIDS prevention progrms includign Counseling and lest-ing sevices" 
Partner Notification and Referral services, Health Education and Risk Reduction ser vices, 
and Public Information services. 

TTI. Outcnmes/Qhiectives: 

To provide AIDS prevention services to the residents of San Francisco in order to p revent 
the transmission of HIV. 



TV, Fffect* of Reduction or Ignninalias af Thr=e Fupri<- 
The efforts of the AIDS Office to limit the transmission of HIV in San Francisco 
would be severely impaired if we did not apply for this funding. 



V. Financial Information: 
Col. A 



Col- 



Col. C 



Col. D 

Chxnge 



Reo. Match Approved hv 



Two Ycirs Ago P2SI Yeir/Orig. - Proposed 

Grant Amount 6,032,973 6,099,135 6,250,000 + 150.865 

Personnel 2,066,590 2,574,965 

Equipment 13,810 16,982 

■Contract Svc. 3,413,269 2,582,671 

Mat. & Su PP . 56,146 115,206 

Facilities/Space 1 14 , 288 

Other 33,244 

Indirect Costs 335 ,626 



154.075 
246.510 
408,726 



VT. Data Pr"cr< 



(cruo indu'td »bo-t) 



7,000 



VTT, Prr?opnf| 

F/T CSC Appro x: 46.00 

P/T CSC 

Contractual 



16,982 



51.65 



1993 Bu dget is i n d evei opment ; will be 



provi de d with Acc ep t and Expe nd request. 



Source(s) of non-grant funding for salaries of CSC employees working part-time on this grant: 
None . 

Will grant funded employees be retained after this grant terminates? If so, How? 
No. 



•VTIT, Contractual Service: Open Bid 



Sole Source 



( J ~i. »cn. .c«i R^c* ir Lkr=puo r«r= ) 



Contractual method of selection information will be included in 

rhp Arrpnt anH FvnpnH rpniiocf JO 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Item 2 - File 100-92-5 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of 
August 5, 1992. 

This is a hearing to consider the impact of State budget cuts on the revenues 
of the City and County of San Francisco. 

As of the writing of this report, several different proposals by the Governor 
and various portions of the California Legislature exist and no final steps have 
been taken toward final adoption of the 1992-93 State budget. Until such final 
adoption, we are unable to assess the exact impact on the revenues and 
expenditures of the City and County of San Francisco. 



37 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Item 3 - File 25-92-22 

Note: This item was continued from the July 29, 1992 Finance Committee 
Meeting. 



Department 
Item: 



Services to 
be Performed: 



Description: 



Police Department 

Resolution concurring with the Controller's Certification of 
Costs required by Charter Section 8.300-1 (Proposition J) that 
certain services can continue to be practically performed by a 
private contractor for a lower cost than similar services 
performed by the City and County of San Francisco. 



Janitorial Services for all nine District Police stations, the 
Police Academy, the Pistol Range, the Juvenile Division, and 
the Golden Gate stables. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for these 
janitorial services in fiscal year 1992-93 would result in 
estimated savings as follows: 

Highest Lowest 

Salary Step Salary Step 



DPW Operated Costs 

Contracted Service Cost 

Estimated Savings for Contracted 
Service Cost 



$740,230 $617,815 



2 8Q . QQ 



280,000 



$460,230 $337,815 



Comments: 



1. The above DPW Operated Cost estimate reflects amounts 
submitted by the Department of Public Works (DPW) to the 
Controller and certified by the Controller. The Contracted 
Service Cost estimate is based on the approximate lowest 
price bid received from the three janitorial contract bidders 
on July 27, 1992. 

2. However, Mr. Ara Manasian of the Purchasing 
Department states that the above estimates are based on 
information obtained by the Controller while negotiations 
were still in progress. According to Mr. Manasian, bid 
proposals from the janitorial contractors are still being 
evaluated, and a final determination of the low responsive 
bidders has not yet been made. Mr. Manasian indicates that 
the low bidders appear to be Custodial Janitorial Service and 
Building Maintenance and Township Building Services and 
there is likely to be two bidders awarded the proposed 
janitorial services contracts. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



-*« 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



3. At its meeting of July 29, 1992, the Finance Committee 
requested Mr. Art Martinez, proprietor of Custodial 
Janitorial Service and Building Maintenance, to provide 
additional information concerning the number of employees 
who would provide services to the Police Department if his 
firm received the contract, and to specify the wage rates and 
health benefits which those employees would receive. Mr. 
Martinez has informed the Budget Analyst that he believes it 
is not in his best interests to disclose this information. 

4. DPW currently provides janitorial services to the Police 
Department. FY 1992-93 would be the first year that the Police 
Department would fully contract for these janitorial services. 

5. According to Officer Tom Strong, of the Police 
Department's Accounting Office, the Police Department paid 
$33,796 to the Department of Public Works to provide 
janitorial services during the period of July 1, 1992 to July 31, 
1992. This money was paid with money from the Police 
Department's FY 1992-93 Building and Repair budget. This 
was done to prevent a lapse in service as the Police 
Department was still in the process of selecting a private 
contractor. Mr. Strong advises that a total of $280,000 has 
been budgeted for contracted janitorial services in the FY 
1992-93 budget. The $33,796 used to provide janitorial services 
in July, as well as any amounts required to be expended 
pending selection of a contractor, will be deducted from the 
$280,000 and returned to the Building and Repair account. 
The remaining balance will be used to pay for the contracted 
janitorial services. 

6. Mr. Steve Lutz, Senior Analyst of the Police Department's 
Planning Division, reports that the scope of janitorial 
services provided to the Police Department would eliminate 
the Hibernia Bank Building facility and add the Pistol Range. 
In addition, Mr. Lutz stated that the Police Department has 
not been satisfied with the level of service currently provided 
by DPW. As a result, Mr. Arnie Sowell of the Controller's 
Office reports that the 1992-93 proposed in-house versus 
contracted services represent a higher level of janitorial 
services than what has been historically provided. Mr. 
Raymond Zahndt of the Department of Public Works 
estimates that to provide the level of service the Police 
Department is now requesting, the Department of Public 
Works would have to expand their current staff level from 6 
FTE to 13 FTE. This increased level of service is reflected 
above in the DPW Operated Cost estimate and Contracted 
Service Cost estimate provided by the Controller's Office. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

39 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



7. The Finance Committee requested that the Controller 
estimate the costs of the Police Department providing these 
services directly by employing janitors. The Controller has 
determined that Police Department In-house Janitorial 
Services as compared with DPW Janitorial Services and 
contractual janitorial services are as follows: 



DPW Operated Costs 

Police Department In-House 
Janitorial Services 

RgtimateH Savings for Police VS DPW 
.Tanitm-ial Services 



Police Department In-House 
Janitorial Services 

Contracted Service Cost 

Estimated Savings for Contracted 
Service Cost vs. Police In-House 



Highest 
Salarv Step 


Lowest 
Salarv Step 


$740,230 


$617315 


726.344 


625.934 


$13386 


($8,119) 


726,344 


625,934 


2ao,ooo 


280.000 



$446344 $345334 



Therefore, as noted above, it would be between $8,119 more 
expensive to $13,886 less expensive for the Police Department 
to directly provide its own janitorial services in 1992-93 rather 
than through DPW. However, as also noted above, it would be 
approximately $345,934 to $446,344 less expensive for the 
Police Department to contract out for janitorial services than 
to hire in-house janitors in the Police Department. As 
previously discussed, changing from the current DPW 
janitorial services to contractual janitorial services would 
result in an estimated 1992-93 annualized savings ranging 
from approximately $337,815 to $460,230. 

8. The Police Department reports that two of the three 
contract bidders, including the lowest contract bidder, are 
MBEs or WBEs. 

9. Mr. Carl Bunch of the Mayor's Office, Employee Relations 
Division, advises that the City of San Francisco does not have 
a duty to meet and confer with the Union regarding the 
contracting out of services before a decision is made unless 
layoffs will occur as a result of the decision. However, 
following a decision to contract out, the City does have an 
obligation to meet and confer with the Union regarding the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



impact of the decision on bargaining unit employees. The 
Service Employees International Union's (SEIU), 
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) also states that upon 
request by the Union and prior to the City making any final 
decision, the City will hold informational meetings with the 
Union to discuss and attempt to resolve issues relating to the 
contracting out of services. 

10. The Controller's Office notes that the proposed Proposition 
J certification must be approved prior to any contract for 
services being awarded. The Controller's supplemental 
questionnaire with the Department's responses, including 
MBE/WBE status, is attached. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



41 



07/22/92 13:54 ©415 554 7568 SPECIAL PROJhLlb --- HAKxti » .kuse guy,*. 



Charter 8.300-1 (Proposition J) Questionnaire 

Department San Francisco Police Department 
Contract Services Janitorial Service 



Time Period 



1) Who performed services prior to contracting out? 

Department of Public Works Janitorial. 

2) Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting 
out? 

None, these employees should easily be absorbed into 
DPW operations. 

3) Explain disposition of employees if they were laid off. 

Trained janitorial employee would be able to find 
employment in federal, state and private sectors. 

4) What percent of City employee's time is spent on services to be 
contracted out? 

100% 

5) How long have services been contracted out? 

These services have been performed by the Department 
of Public Works; they have never been contracted out. 

6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J 
Certification? 

It is anticipated to commence by 1992-1993. 

7) How will contract services meet the goals of your MBE/WBE 
Action Plan? 

The competitive bid process will insure compliance. 
Present contractor at the Hibernia Bank Police 
Building is MBE/LBE. 



<^^ 




Department /Representative MICHAEL J. SULLIVAN 

SERGEANT OF POLICE 



(Type Name, Title) 

557-6720 

Telephone 

cxlquespj 



kl 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Items 4. 5. 6. 7. and 8 -Fil es 97-92-42. 97-92-43. 97-92-43.1. 97-92-44. and 97-92-44 1 

Note: These items were continued from the Finance Committee meeting of July 29, 
1992. 

Items: Ordinance amending Section 10.117-73 of the Administrative Code to 

require that the Emergency Medical Services Fund be continued using 
certain penalty revenues pursuant to Government Code Sections 
76000 and 76104, to require that the moneys in such fund be payable 
only for the purposes specified in Government Code Section 76104, 
and to make changes pursuant to recent amendments to Health and 
Safety Code Sections 1797.98a through 1797.98g (File 97-92-42). 

Ordinance amending Section 10.117-108 of the Administrative Code to 
establish the Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund, to require 
that the moneys in such fund be payable only for the purposes set 
forth in Government Code Section 76102, and to renumber Charter 
Section 6.311 to 6.306 (File 97-92-43). 

Resolution providing for the disbursement of certain additional 
penalties assessed in criminal cases pursuant to Government Code 
76000, establishing a Courthouse Construction Fund pursuant to 
Government Code Section 76100, establishing an Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 
76102, continuing an Emergency Medical Services Fund pursuant to 
Government Code Section 76104, and imposing an additional penalty 
on all parking offenses to support the Courthouse Construction Fund 
pursuant to Government Code Section 76000 (File 97-92-43.1). 

Ordinance amending Section 10.117-35 of the Ackninistrative Code to 
rename the "Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund" the 
"Courthouse Construction Fund," to require that surcharges on filing 
fees in the Municipal and Superior Courts and penalty assessments 
provided in Government Code Section 76000 be deposited in such 
fund, and to require that the moneys deposited in such fund be used 
only for the purposes set forth in Government Code Sections 76000, 
76100, and 76238 (File 97-92-44). 

Resolution renaming the Courthouse Construction Fund and 
continuing the surcharge on filing fees in civil and probate actions in 
the Superior Court and in civil actions in the Municipal Court as 
provided in Government Code Section 76238 and Section 10.117-35 of 
the San Francisco Administrative Code, to assist in the acquisition, 
rehabilitation, construction, and financing of courtrooms or of a 
courtroom building or buildings containing facilities necessary or 
incidental to the operation of the judicial system in the City and 
County of San Francisco (File 97-92-44.1). 



BOARD OF SU PERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Description: In August, 1991 the State Legislature adopted the Trial Court 
Realignment and Efficiency Act ("the Act") which made a number of 
revisions to California law regarding the operation of California trial 
courts. The Act provides that certain fines and penalties levied by 
Municipal and Superior Courts must be deposited into one or more 
special funds, as specified in the California Government Code. 

County Penalty Assessment in Criminal Matters 

The Act requires that Counties impose a "County penalty assessment" 
of $7.00 for every $10.00 fine, penalty, or forfeiture, or fraction 
thereof, imposed in criminal matters, including violations of the 
Vehicle Code, but excluding parking offenses. 

The Board of Supervisors must, by resolution, establish one or more of 
the five special funds authorized by the Legislature, and must also 
specify the amount of County penalty assessment revenues to be 
allocated to each fund. The $7.00 County penalty assessment has 
been imposed in San Francisco since September 11, 1991. 

The proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1) would establish three special 
funds and direct the Municipal and Superior Courts to continue to 
assess the $7.00 additional penalty for each $10 penalty imposed in 
criminal matters. For each $7.00 collected, the proposed resolution 
would direct the County Treasurer to deposit $1.00 to the Courthouse 
Construction Fund, $2.00 to the Emergency Medical Services Fund, 
and $4.00 to the Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund. 

The two special funds which could be established under the Act but 
which would not be established under the proposed resolution are a 
Criminal Justice Facilities Construction Fund and a Forensics 
Laboratory Fund. 

Pursuant to the proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1), two proposed 
ordinances would amend provisions of the Administrative Code 
concerning the existing Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund 
(File 97-92-43) and the existing Emergency Medical Services Fund 
(File 97-92-42) to make them consistent with current California law. 

Parking Fine Surcharge ($2.50) 

The Act also requires the Board of Supervisors to impose an additional 
$2.50 penalty for every parking offense where a fine is imposed, and to 
deposit the additional revenue in a Courthouse Construction Fund, 
provided that the Board of Supervisors adopts a resolution stating 
that the imposition of this additional penalty is necessary to the 
County for courthouse construction. Of each $2.50 additional penalty 
for parking offenses, the County is required to transfer $1.00 to the 
State Controller. 

BOARD OF STJPERVTSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

44 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

The proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1) would therefore also state 
the necessary findings regarding courthouse construction, impose the 
additional $2.50 penalty for parking offenses, and direct the Treasurer 
to deposit the additional $2.50 penalty to the Courthouse Construction 
Fund and to remit $1.00 of each $2.50 collected to the State 
Controller. 

The Act also authorizes the Counties to impose another $2.50 
surcharge on parking fines for deposit to a Criminal Justice Facilities 
Construction Fund. However, this additional $2.50 surcharge is not 
included in the proposed legislation (see Comment No. 11). 

Filing Fee Surcharges in Municipal and Superior Courts 

In addition, Section 76238 of the Act provides that the City and 
County of San Francisco may impose a surcharge of not more than $50 
on filing fees in civil and probate matters in the Superior Court, and 
not more than $50 in civil proceedings in the Municipal Court, for the 
San Francisco Courthouse Construction Fund. The amount of the 
surcharge must be established by the Board of Supervisors. 

Section 76238 replaced former Government Code Section 76381.5, 
under which San Francisco had already established the Courthouse 
Temporary Construction Fund. A surcharge of $50 is currently added 
to filing fees in Superior Court and a surcharge of $10 is currently 
added to filing fees in Municipal Court. 

The proposed resolution (File 97-92-44.1) would therefore rename the 
"Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund" as the "Courthouse 
Construction Fund" and would direct the Municipal and Superior 
Courts to continue to collect the $10 and $50 surcharges on filing fees, 
respectively, for deposit to the Courthouse Construction Fund. 

Pursuant to both proposed resolutions (Files 97-92-43.1 and 97-92- 
44.1) affecting the Courthouse Construction Fund, a proposed 
ordinance (File 97-92-44) would amend the Administrative Code to 
rename the "Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund" as the 
"Courthouse Construction Fund," and to require that revenues derived 
from the $7.00 County penalty assessment in criminal cases (of which 
$1.00 is proposed for the Courthouse Construction Fund), the $2.50 
additional penalty in parking cases (of which $1.50 would go to the 
Courthouse Construction Fund), and the Municipal and Superior 
Court filing fee surcharges ($10 and $50, respectively) be deposited to 
the newly named Courthouse Construction Fund. 

Comments: 1. As noted above, the fees affected by the proposed resolutions and 
ordinances are a $7.00 County penalty assessment for criminal 
offenses, a $2.50 additional penalty for parking offenses, a $10 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

as 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



surcharge on filing fees for civil proceedings in Municipal Court, and a 
$50 surcharge on filing fees for civil and probate proceedings in 
Superior Court. Of these fees, the only new fee would be the $2.50 
additional penalty for parking offenses, which was approved by the 
Municipal Court in June, 1992. However, the $7.00 County penalty 
assessment which took effect in September, 1991 would be a new 
source of revenue to the Courthouse Construction Fund and the 
Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund. 

Each of the three special funds which would receive the designated 
revenues have already been established in some form. The following 
table illustrates the current sources of revenue for these funds and the 
proposed allocations, as described above. 



Current and Proposed Revenue Allocations Under the 
Trial Court Realignment and Efficiency Act 

Current Source Proposed Source 
Fund of Revenues of Revenues 

Courthouse (Temporary) $10 Municipal Ct. fee $10 Municipal Ct. fee 

Construction Fund $50 Superior Ct. fee $50 Superior Ct. fee 

$2.50 parking fine 

surcharge, less $ 1.00 

to State Controller 

$1.00 of the 

$7.00 additional 

penalty in 

criminal cases 

Emergency Medical Services Fund $2.00 of the $2.00 of the 

$7.00 additional $7.00 additional 

penalty in penalty in 

criminal cases criminal cases 

Automated Fingerprint I.D. Fund None $4.00 of the 

$7.00 additional 

penalty in 

criminal cases 



2. According to Mr. Gordon Park-Li of the Municipal Court, the $2.50 
surcharge was included in the bail increases for parking offenses 
which were approved by the Municipal Court in June, 1992. 

3. Mr. Park-Li indicates that San Francisco has not yet established 
any of the special funds required to be established pursuant to the Act 
(although Funds were established under other sections of law), nor 



BOARD OF S UPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

46 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



has the Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution (see File 97-92-43.1) 
indicating how the $7.00 County penalty assessment is to be allocated. 

4. Based on revenue estimates provided by the Controller's Office and 
the Courts, the amounts collected in 1991-92 and the amounts 
expected to be allocated under the proposed resolutions and 
ordinances are as follows: 

Revenues Collected 



Fund 



Actual 
1991-92 



Courthouse (Temporary) 
Construction Fund 

$50 Superior Ct. surcharge $1,603,620 

$10 Municipal Ct., surcharge 278,845 
Annual Interest on filing fee surcharges 400,683 

Total filing fee revenues 

$2.50 parking fine surcharge 

$1.00 of $7.00 additional penalty* 132.281 

Subtotal $2,415,429 

Emergency Medical Services Fund 

$2.00 of $7.00 additional penalty* 264,561 

Automated Fingerprint I.D. Fund 

$4.00 of $7.00 additional penalty* 529.122 

Total Estimated Revenues $3,209,112 



Estimated 
1992-93 



$1,603,620 
278,845 
400,683 

$2,283,148 

2,250,000 

163.088 

$4,696,236 



326,177 

652.353 
$5,674,766 



* Actual allocations, including allocations for 1991-92, would be made 
based on the formula approved by the Board of Supervisors. 

The General Fund would not receive any portion of these revenues. 

5. The Act requires that the amounts allocated to the Emergency 
Medical Services Fund equal but not exceed the amount deposited in 
fiscal year 1990-91 (except for a percentage increase equal to the 
increase in criminal fines and penalties over fiscal year 1990-91, but 
not more than 10 percent). 

Under the proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1) the Emergency 
Medical Services Fund would continue to receive $2.00 of the $7.00 
County penalty assessment. 

The Emergency Medical Services Fund is used to reimburse 
physicians, hospitals, and other providers of emergency medical care 
for the cost of emergency medical care. The Director of Public Health 
is responsible for receiving and approving claims for reimbursement. 
However, any payments to a single provider in excess of $5,000 must 
be appropriated by the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



6. The Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund was established in 
San Francisco in March, 1991, when the Board of Supervisors 
authorized an additional penalty of $.50 for each $10 penalty in 
criminal matters. Mr. Park-Li states that the $.50 additional penalty 
was never imposed because of procedural delays, and because the 
penalty assessment formula was modified when the Trial Court 
Realignment and Efficiency Act was approved in August, 1991. 
Therefore, no revenues have been allocated to the Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund, according to Mr. Park-Li. Under the 
proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1), revenues to this Fund would 
come from $4.00 of the $7.00 additional penalty (for each $10 
collected) in criminal cases. 

An Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund is required to be used 
to obtain and operate automated fingerprint identification equipment, 
to replace existing equipment, and/or to reimburse the City and 
County for previous expenditures for such equipment. 

The SFPD's 1992-93 budgeted expenditures from the Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund total approximately $1,746,000. The 
proposed budget for 1992-93 includes $700,000 in estimated penalty 
assessment revenues to this Fund, as well as a revenue transfer from 
the General Fund of approximately $1,046,000. Therefore, General 
Fund contributions could be reduced by increasing County penalty 
assessment allocations to the Automated Fingerprint Identification 
Fund under the proposed resolution (97-92-43.1). 

The Administrative Code provides that expenditures from the 
Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund are subject to 
appropriation by the Board of Supervisors. 

7. The existing Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund was 
established in 1983, and, as noted above, currently receives revenues 
from a $10 surcharge on filing fees in Municipal Court and a $50 
surcharge on filing fees in Superior Court. These filing fee surcharges 
were authorized under State law prior to enactment of the Trial Court 
Realignment and Efficiency Act of 1991 (see Comment No 8). 

Under the Act, a Courthouse Construction Fund is required to be used 
for the acquisition, rehabilitation, construction, and financing of 
"courtrooms, or a courtroom building or buildings containing facilities 
necessary or incidental to the operation of the justice system." The 
Administrative Code provides that expenditures from the existing 
Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund are to be determined by a 
committee comprised of Court officers, with expenditures subject to 
appropriation by the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

48 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



8. As previously noted, the Municipal Court is authorized to impose a 
surcharge of up to $50 on filing fees in civil proceedings for the 
Courthouse Construction Fund. However, under the proposed 
resolution (File 97-92-44.1) the surcharge in Municipal Court would 
continue to be $10. 

The surcharge on filing fees in Superior Court was increased by $30 
from $20 to $50 in April, 1990. At that time, Mr. Donald Dickinson of 
the Superior Court reported that the increase in the surcharge was 
needed in anticipation of the County Courthouse Facility Capital 
Expenditure Bond Act of 1990, which appeared as State Proposition 
150 on the November, 1990 ballot. The proposed $200 million bond 
act would have provided State bond revenues for courthouse 
construction projects State-wide, but required a local match of 25 
percent of any project costs. Although the $30 increase in Superior 
Court filing fee surcharges was approved by the Board of Supervisors 
in April 1990, the bond measure was defeated in the November 1990 
election by a vote of 73.6 percent opposed and 26.4 percent in favor. 
In San Francisco, the vote was 55.1 percent opposed and 44.9 percent 
in favor. 

According to Ms. Harrison, approximately $8.4 million of filing fee 
surcharge revenues have been deposited to the existing Courthouse 
Temporary Construction Fund since it was established in 1983. Of 
the $8.4 million deposited, approximately $1.7 million has been 
expended for courtroom facilities, leaving a current balance of 
approximately $6.7 million, according to Ms. Harrison. 

Ms. Harrison states that the Courts wish to accumulate funds to 
construct a County Courthouse. She indicates that representatives of 
the Courts have conferred with representatives of the Chief 
Administrative Officer concerning the feasibility of constructing new 
additional Courtroom facilities. 

9. The Trial Court Realignment and Efficiency Act also authorizes the 
Board of Supervisors to establish a Criminal Justice Facilities 
Construction Fund or a Forensics Laboratory Fund. However, neither 
of these Funds would be established under the proposed legislation. 

The Act provides that the Criminal Justice Facilities Construction 
Fund may be used for "construction, reconstruction, expansion, 
improvement, operation, or maintenance of county criminal justice 
and court facilities and for improvement of criminal justice automated 
information systems." The Act states that criminal justice facilities 
"include, but [are] not limited to, jails, women's centers, detention 
facilities, juvenile halls, and courtrooms." 

The Budget Analyst notes that, since expenditures from a Criminal 
Justice Facilities Construction Fund are authorized for operation and 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



49 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



maintenance of criminal justice facilities, this Fund could offset 
General Fund expenditures for operations of the jails, juvenile justice 
facilities, and the court system. In contrast, expenditures from the 
Courthouse Construction Fund are limited to capital projects 
involving the expansion of courtroom facilities, and cannot be used for 
operating expenses. 

10. In 1991-92, revenues to the Courthouse Temporary Construction 
Fund from filing fee surcharges were $1,882,465, and annual interest 
accruing to the Fund balance of approximately $6.7 million was 
$400,683, for a total of $2,283,148 in 1991-92, according to Ms. 
Harrison. Ms. Harrison reports that the Courthouse Construction 
Fund must be established in order to obtain the approximately $1.88 
million which is available through surcharges on filing fees in 
Municipal and Superior Courts. These surcharges must be used 
exclusively for courthouse construction. If this Fund were not 
established, the filing fee surcharges could not be collected. Ms. 
Harrison states that, in her opinion, it is inadvisable to forego filing 
fee revenues of approximately $1.88 million for courthouse facilities by 
not establishing the Fund. 

The Budget Analyst notes that although filing fee revenues would be 
foregone if the Courthouse Construction Fund were not established, 
interest on the Fund balance, which is now approximately $6.7 
million, would continue to accrue. Mr. Ted Lakey of the City 
Attorney's Office states that, in his opinion, the fact that $6.7 million 
is on deposit in the Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund does 
not require that San Francisco establish a Courthouse Construction 
Fund pursuant to the Trial Court Realignment and Efficiency Act. 

11. If a Courthouse Construction Fund is established, the City would 
be required to impose a $2.50 parking surcharge for deposit to this 
Fund, according to Mr. Lakey. If a Criminal Justice Facilities 
Construction Fund were also established, a second parking surcharge 
of $2.50 would also be required. The total parking fine surcharge 
would therefore be $5.00 for both Funds, of which $2.00 would be 
remitted to the State. 

Mr. Park-Li states that representatives of the Courts and the Mayor's 
Office have agreed that to impose both parking surcharges would 
result in unreasonable increases in parking fines, and could limit the 
City's ability to raise parking fines in the future, which would benefit 
the General Fund. For these reasons, according to Mr. Park-Li, a 
Criminal Justices Facilities Construction Fund, in addition to the 
Courthouse Construction Fund, was not proposed. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

50 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



The Budget Analyst notes that if the Municipal Court imposed a $2.50 
increase in parking bails, rather than the State-mandated $2.50 
increase in the parking penalty surcharge, the same number of 
citations would result in General Fund revenues of $3.75 million, 
rather than special fund revenues of $2.25 million and remittance of 
$1.5 million to the State, since the City would not be required to remit 
$1.00 of each $2.50 collected to the State. 

In summary, if the Criminal Justice Facilities Construction Fund 
were established instead of the Courthouse Construction Fund, filing 
fee surcharges of approximately $1.88 million for courthouse 
construction would be foregone. If it were established in addition to 
the Courthouse Construction Fund, parking surcharges would 
increase by $5.00, rather than $2.50, of which $2.00, or 40 percent, 
would be transferred to the State Controller. 

The table on the following page reflects the fiscal impact of several 
alternative policy decisions. The components of the current proposal 
appear in bold type under Alternative A. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

51 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



CQmparisQii of Policy Alternatives 



Alternative 



Annual Revenues 



Courthouse 
Construction 



General Fund loJal 



A. Create the Courthouse Construction Fund 
Omit the Criminal Justice Facilities Fund 

1. Filing fee surcharges for courthouse facilities $1,880,000 

2. $2.50 Parking fine surcharge 
for courthouse construction 2,250,000 

3. Potential new revenues from $2.50 increase in 
parking bails, if a pproved hv the Municipal Court — 



Totals 

B. Omit the Courthouse Construction Fund 
Create the Criminal Justice Facilities Fund 

1. Filing fee surcharges could not be imposed 

2. $2.50 Parking fine surcharge for operation 
and maintenance of criminal justice facilities 

3. Potential new revenues from $2.50 increase in 
parking bails, if approved by the Municipal Court 

Totals 

C. Create the Courthouse Construction Fund 
Create the Criminal Justice Facilities Fund 

1. Filing fee surcharges for courthouse 
construction projects 

2. $2.50 Parking fine surcharge 
for courthouse construction 

3. $2.50 Parking fine surcharge for operation 
and maintenance of criminal justice facilities 

Totals 



$1,880,000 
2,250,000 

~ $ 3.750.000 3.750.000 

$4.130.000 $3,750.000 $7,880,000 



$2,250,000* $2,250,000 

3.750.000 3.750.000 

$6,000,000 $6,000,000 



$1,880,000 — $1,880,000 

2,250,000 — 2,250,000 

— $ 2.250.000 * 2.250.000 

$4,130,000 $2.250,000* $6.380,000 



* Potential General Fund expenditure reductions resulting from expenditures by the 
Criminal Justice Facilities Construction Fund. 



The table includes parking and filing fee surcharges only. County 
penalty assessment revenues are not included, but could be allocated 
to either or both funds, once established. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



52 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



As previously noted, since the Criminal Justice Facilities Construction 
Fund can be used for operating expenses of criminal justice facilities, 
expenditures from this fund could be used for new equipment or 
services, or to reduce current General Fund expenditures for criminal 
justice facilities. If a Courthouse Construction Fund were not 
established, any necessary expenditures for courthouse construction 
in excess of the balance of the existing Courthouse Temporary 
Construction Fund could require General Fund contributions. 

12. For purposes of comparison, the table above includes estimated 
revenues from proposed Municipal and Superior Court filing fee 
surcharges of $10 and $50, respectively, as well as a total increase of 
$5.00 in nominal parking fines. Nominal parking fines could increase 
either due to parking surcharges imposed under the Act or by an 
equivalent increase in parking bails imposed by the Municipal Court. 

Alternative A, which includes the Courthouse Construction Fund, 
would generate the most revenue for the City. However, a significant 
portion of this revenue would be reserved for courthouse construction 
projects. The benefit to the General Fund under this alternative 
would require agreement by the Municipal Court to impose an 
additional $2.50 increase in parking bails. 

Alternative A also shows that it would be more cost effective for the 
Municipal Court to impose a single parking fine bail increase of $2.50 
(which would generate $3.75 million for the General Fund), rather 
than the parking fine and filing fee surcharges for courthouse 
construction (which would generate $4.13 million for the Courthouse 
Construction Fund). In either case, an additional $2.50 would be paid 
by parking violators. However, filing fee surcharges totalling $1.88 
million would be imposed in order to generate only $380,000 
($4,130,000 vs. $3,750,000) in additional revenue. 

Alternative B, which includes only the Criminal Justice Facilities 
Construction Fund, would have the greatest impact on the General 
Fund, since each $2.50 increase in nominal parking penalties ($2.50 
from a parking surcharge and $2.50 from a potential increase in bails) 
would benefit the General Fund. However, part of the benefit to the 
General Fund under this alternative would depend upon agreement 
by the Municipal Court to impose an increase of $2.50 in parking 
bails. Alternative B would also generate the least total revenue for 
the City, since filing fee surcharges for courthouse construction could 
not be imposed. 

Under Alternative C, the only benefit to the General Fund would be 
$2.25 million in expenditure reductions, if proceeds in the Criminal 
Justice Facilities Construction Fund were used for operating 
expenses. However, this $2.25 million impact would not be dependent 
upon the actions of the Municipal Court, since the $2.50 parking 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

53 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



surcharge for the Criminal Justice Facilities Construction Fund would 
be required, once the Fund is established. 

14. In summary, the proposed legislation would result in 
approximately $4.1 million in annual revenues to the Courthouse 
Construction Fund, but would forego approximately $2.25 million for 
criminal justice facilities from a $2.50 parking tax surcharge which is 
allowed under the Act, and which could offset General Fund 
expenditures. Alternatively, an equivalent $2.50 increase in parking 
bails, if imposed by the Municipal Court, would generate $3.75 million 
for the General Fund. 

The Municipal Court believes than an additional $2.50 increase in 
parking penalties, whether from a parking surcharge or a bail 
increase, would result in an unreasonable increase in parking fines. 
However, as noted above, under the proposed legislation, San 
Francisco citizens would pay $1.88 million in filing fee surcharges in 
order to generate revenues only $380,000 higher than if a parking bail 
increase were approved by the Municipal Court, in lieu of the parking 
surcharge which has already been approved. 

Since the Courthouse Temporary Construction Fund was established 
in 1983, approximately $8.4 million has been deposited, $1.7 million 
has been expended, and the current balance is approximately $6.7 
million. Although the Courts indicate that a new County Courthouse, 
or a building containing courtrooms, is being contemplated, nearly 80 
percent of the courtroom construction funds collected have not been 
expended. 

In contrast, the Board of Supervisors has approved a $158 million 
bond measure for reconstruction of the San Bruno Jail, and has tabled 
a proposed $78.9 million bond measure for construction of a new 
Juvenile Justice Complex. Moreover, any expenditures from a 
Criminal Justice Facilities Construction Fund for current operating 
expenses of the criminal justice system (including courtrooms) could 
result in equivalent General Fund expenditure reductions, thereby 
releasing funds for other City services. 



Recommendations: 



1. The proposed resolution (File 97-92-43.1) contains the following 
provisions which are policy matters for the Board of Supervisors: 

(a) Establishing the Emergency Medical Services Fund, the 
Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund, and the Courthouse 
Construction Fund pursuant to Government Code Section 76000, for 
receipt of County penalty assessments of $7.00 for each $10 collected 
in criminal cases; and, by omission, not establishing a Criminal 
Justice Facilities Construction Fund nor a Forensic Laboratory Fund. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

54 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 



(b) Specifying that each $7.00 County penalty assessment will be 
allocated as follows: $1.00 to the Courthouse Construction Fund, 
$2.00 to the Emergency Medical Services Fund, and $4.00 to the 
Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund. 

(c) Imposing an additional penalty of $2.50 for each parking offense 
where a penalty is imposed, for allocation to the Courthouse 
Construction Fund, as required if the Fund is established. 

2. If the Board of Supervisors wishes to continue the Emergency 
Medical Services Fund (File 97-92-42) and the Automated Fingerprint 
Identification Fund (File 97-92-43), the Budget Analyst recommends 
approval of these proposed ordinances, which would conform the San 
Francisco Administrative Code to the current requirements of 
California law. 

3. Since California law authorizes but does not require the San 
Francisco Board of Supervisors to impose surcharges on filing fees in 
the Municipal and Superior Courts for the Courthouse Construction 
Fund, and to fix the amount of the surcharges, approval of the 
proposed resolution (File 97-92-44.1), which would continue the 
existing surcharges, is a policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 

4. If the Board of Supervisors wishes to establish the Courthouse 
Construction Fund, the Budget Analyst recommends approval of the 
proposed ordinance (File 97-92-44), which would conform the San 
Francisco Administrative Code to the current requirements of 
California law. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



ss 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

Item 9 - File 127-92-4 

Note: This item was transferred from the City Services Committee as it was 
determined to have a fiscal impact on the City. 

Item: Ordinance amending the San Francisco Municipal Code 

Part III (Revenue and Business Regs.) by deleting Sections 
215 through 219 and 222 to 223 inclusive and amending 
Article I of the San Francisco Health Code by adding 
Sections 41.15 through 41.25 thereto, to require every 
person owning, keeping, and controlling any dog over the 
age of four months to vaccinate said dog against rabies and 
to obtain a license for said dog; requiring every person 
procuring a young dog from any animal shelter to obtain 
certificate for said young dog, and setting forth exceptions 
and penalties. 



Description: In 1989, the State of California declared the City and 

County of San Francisco to be a rabies-endemic County, 
meaning that for public health reasons precautions should 
be taken against the incidence of rabies. The State requires 
that all dogs in rabies-endemic Counties must be 
vaccinated against the rabies virus, and that the 
vaccination must be valid for the entire term of a dog 
license. 

Dog licensure in San Francisco is presently governed by the 
Revenue and Business Regulations Code of the San 
Francisco Municipal Code, which requires owners of dogs to 
obtain a dog license between July 1 and August 3 1 of each 
fiscal year; the license is valid until the following June 30 
(the end of the fiscal year). As noted above, the State 
requires that a dog must be vaccinated against rabies for 
the entire period of the license, which is always through 
June 30, under the current San Francisco system. 
Therefore, only dogs which are vaccinated through June 30 
can be licensed, and those with rabies vaccinations which 
expire prior to June 30 cannot be licensed in San Francisco. 

Since licenses are only issued in July and August, at the 
beginning of each fiscal year, a dog may need to be re- 
vaccinated several months before its current rabies 
vaccination expires (for instance, if its vaccination expires 
in January), in order to obtain a license through June 30. 
For medical reasons, a dog usually should not be re- 
vaccinated in an untimely manner, according to the 
Department of Animal Care and Control. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

56 



Memo to Finance Committee 
August 12, 1992 

The proposed ordinance would delete the Revenue and 
Business Code sections which now govern dog licensure, 
and would add new provisions to the City's Health Code 
which would 1) prohibit owning or keeping a dog in San 
Francisco without having obtained a current San Francisco 
license for the dog, and 2) require that all dogs over the age 
of 4 months shall at all times have current rabies 
vaccinations, for as long as San Francisco continues to be 
designated by the State as a rabies endemic county. 
Whereas the current law states that licenses must be 
applied for in July or August and renewed annually, the 
proposed ordinance would permit licenses to be issued at 
any time, and licenses would be valid up to 36 months, but 
not longer than the validity period of the rabies vaccination. 
Identification tags would be issued for licensed dogs, and 
the tags would be required to be worn at all times. 

The proposed new sections of the Health Code would also 
impose, for the first time, a 30 day deadline for licensure of 
a newly acquired dog, or for an expired dog license to be 
renewed, and would permit a late penalty to be assessed if 
the dog's license is not acquired or renewed before the 30- 
day deadline. 

The proposed